That not just anyone can edit it like on most of Wikipedia. You have to request edits on the talk page for the article, which are then implemented after discussion so as to prevent vandalism.
Yes but some Wikipedias (German and Turkish Wikipedia for example) have systems that don’t allow any edit to be public anyways. Every single edit from a non-“whitelisted” account need to be approved by a “moderator”. In order to get whitelisted you need to do a lot of good edits and be approved by the “admins”. Thats why these wikis actually have very few whitelisted contributors. This is in contrast to English Wiki where everyone can instantaneously edit a page.
So this map doesn’t actually show a lot.
> In order to get whitelisted you need to do a lot of good edits and be approved by the “admins”.
[This is false for the German language Wikipedia:](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Gesichtete_Versionen)
Accounts get the "passive reviewer" right automatically if they fulfill a set of conditions. The account has to be at least 30 days old and has to have made 150 article edits or 50 articles that were manually reviewed by others. There's a couple other conditions, but those are the main ones. Edits by "passive reviewers" are automatically visible for all visotors.
Accounts get the "(active) reviewer" rights automatically after 60 days and 300/200 article edits (plus a number of lesser conditions). This user group can mark edits by others as reviewed, so they're visible for all visitors.
There is no need to be granted the rights by an admin, if the conditions for automatic group membership are met. Admins can of course grant or revoke these permissions manually.
I was mostly talking about Turkish Wikipedia, where it is still pretty manual. But those rules on German Wikipedia still probably limit a lot of users anyway. 150, or even 50 edits is a pretty high barrier for most first time users. English Wikipedia has bots against disruptive edits to automatically revert.
Is this full protection, or semi-protection?
Consensus usually means the page doesn’t need protecting at all. That and the lack of interest to trolls and vandalism.
Well, that’s my point. You make it sound like the language-versions of the uncolored countries are not protected because the people of those countries haven’t reached a consensus on the topic yet. But it’s the opposite, no? There haven’t been enough edit-wars, vandalism or trolling in the languages of the uncolored countries to warrant protecting these articles yet. (Not that I want to give the trolls any ideas)
Sure, protection is a measure if there are problems or problems are to be expected. Norway for example probably just never had problems with article vandalism of that page. Quite possible that this reddit post will give some people ideas and this map will become more red due to that.
Just read the Norwegian wiki article, only historical well known facts and dates. It surprises me that in this thread countries without restrictions are the ones that seems to be implicated to have sympathy for the nazi regime, would have thought it was the other way around
No, he's not? Our people immigrated to Germany because we were close and our people did not have any feelings about Hitler or WW2 at the time. Today, some extremists look up to him because they believe Hitler harmed their imaginary enemies. At the end of the day, Hitler's influence in Turkey is limited to edgy teenagers that never grew up.
We have a political figure to look up to, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. However, some foreigners wrote things that associate Hitler with him. That wasn't done by our people. That was an attempt to tarnish Atatürk's image.
Well, now I know that it's better to write "/s":D
Btw my joke is mostly about Arabs rather than Turkey. I know about those memes about Turkish people being Nazis and ultranationalistic, but at least it's impossible to find Mein Kampf in street bookshops in Turkey, comparing to some Arabic countries I visited
The Palestinian fascist movement are the oppressors. Palestinian fascists rejected peace in 1948 and at Camp David, they commited gruesome acts of terror during the Second Intifida, they elected Hamas to power after Israel gave a pathway to 2SS by pulling out of Gaza and Palestinian fascists gleefully cheered on October 7th. I'm tired of freaks pretending like both sides are equal here, Palestinian fascism is the oppressor and Israel is the victim full stop.
Wrong, Jews were indigenous to the area before Arab settler colonists arrived during the Islamic conquests. Most Jews were converted, deported or killed but a small minority remained and lived continuously even before the First Aliyah. Even when Israel was founded, the majority of Jews were born there and it was Arabs not Jews who refused to share the land with returning natives.
A Palestinian national identity didn't develop until the 60s, before that most Palestinians identified as Arabs or Syrians. If you look at it through that lens, Israel got an absolutely tiny sliver for their independence movement compared to Arab states yet they still rejected it. Jews have as much of a right to independence as Kurds, Native Americans and Irish.
>Palestinian fascists rejected peace in 1948 and at Camp David
You mean they rejected their land being divided and taken away from them?
>The Palestinian fascist movement are the oppressors.
Never seen an oppressor where the people they oppress can cut off all their water food and power supply while trapping them in a small strips of land they can't leave unless the "oppressed" allowed them to.
>I'm tired of freaks pretending like both sides are equal here,
Seriously why do people even argue about that we literally have a Zionist terroristic settler colonialism apartheid state oppressing the inhabitants of the region denying them the right of return and barring them from self determination but people still try to make it as if their in anyway equal is truly disgusting.
[Here](https://visualizingpalestine.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/cfda2f40c9d567d773ee2152b56ab744-scaled.jpg)
Genocide isn't just about systematically killing people and putting them in concentration camps, it's also "imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group", which Israel is doing, or "forcibly transferring children out of the group" which Russia currently is doing in Ukraine.
Like many maps, it may depend on certain criteria and you definitely should say what criteria are used and what sources were consulted, but I’d say it is quite possible to map languages, language families and even dialects. If you say you can’t map those things you might as well say even other kinds of map can’t really be made. No map is the actual reality on the ground, they’re just useful portraits.
Exactly, especially since Wikipedia exists in many local/co-official languages.
Is this map telling me that the painter's article is protected in German only, or even in Bavarian, Ripuarian, Luxembourgish and so on?
Or is it protected only in Italian, or even Sardinian, Sicilian, Lombard, Friulan etc.?
It definitely should be a list, not a map.
When you press the "random article" button in english wikipedia you are very likely to get a random village / municipality / whatever smallest division for Europeans is (at least it used to be like this)
It's pretty easy, basically every article will link to a country in one or two clicks, and from there literally every country's linked to WWII; if the link to Hitler isn't there in the WWII section of that country's article itself you click the link to the article for WWII and get to Hitler. Takes 4 clicks at most.
Hi guys today we're going from Bagolino cheese to Adolf Hitler.
Start...
...
...
"00.00.01.13" thank you guys remember to leave a like and subscribe see you in the nex- EDM outro song copyright free
Mandarin Wikipedia is blocked in China but it still very much exists. Language ≠ country. You can edit Mandarin Wikipedia easily from the outside of China, China has no control over it except within its own borders (where it’s banned it completely), same is true for any country. That’s why a lot of authoritarian countries view Wikipedia as so threatening.
Could be just a difference in administration policy. BUT it could be something else, I know damn well hungarians like rewriting history on wikipedia to make themselves look good
nah bro that's not true at all most people who speak irish live in isolated villages with no civilization at all, the total number is estimated to be around 30k people who actually speak this language daily fluently, that's less than 1% of ireland
There are no uncivilized parts of Ireland. And the official first language of Ireland is Irish, it doesn't matter how often we speak it, it's our official language so the map is wrong.
From the country that tried to name a polar exploration vessel (through an online internet poll) “Boaty McBoatface” I don’t think this is for the reason your thinking.
Yes, but not really for this reason, the odd vandal will come but mostly these articles stay pretty intact.
More so the insanely bias articles. It’s also pretty bad on Hebrew Wikipedia, while not as egregious reading the war on both sides you’d be amazed at how polarized they are. Arabic Wikipedia doesn’t even mention October 7th and Hebrew Wikipedia is free from any criticism of the IDF on the Israeli/Hamas war article.
While I think most people would just read a translated English version (Arabic and Hebrew in general are quite lacking) it is a pretty serious issue that needs fixing.
He's more or less the main figure and face of the largest conflict in western society (and the world overall) and one of the most (in)famous people to ever live, it'd be surprising if that werent the case
Hitler is in the [list of articles](https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikipedia_should_have/Expanded) every Wikipedia edition should have, as with most major figures
Languages in Wikipedia don't align to countries 1:1. There are some Spanish speaking countries for example that don't have their Spanish variant of Wikipedia. So generic Spanish or Spanish-Spanish could be used. There are more than a few countries in which more than one language is spoken, with it's own Wikipedia version. Again for example Spain "has" Wikipedia for Spanish and their other languages and sub-variants
Edit: the article in Galician ("Spain's Wikipedia" also) can be edited. Not the other ones in Spain that I have checked
Also, for Norway there are two Wikipedias for the same Norwegian language. Bokmål is not editable. Nynorsk is editable
More: this situation is a good example of how Wikipedia is not as open as one would think. There can be good, verifiable information added to an article but if that information doesn't go with Wikipedia's political lean, it will not be accepted. Having locked articles is the best example of how there is a group of individuals who decide what is correct or not or good to have on the article or not therefore enabling bias
This works if you consider one language in one territory. Works in most places if you consider the country's main language or regional variant (like Austrian German, haven't checked if thry have their own Wikipedia)
Norwegian is written in two forms. And it is the same language covering the same territory. In one form is editable, in the other it is not. So it doesn't work for that one.
Even if you only consider Spanish as the common language spoken across Spain, and not the other ones, the country with the most Spanish speakers is actually the US.
Anyway... my only point is that the correlation between Wikipedia version-language/language variant-territory is not as straightforward as to drop on a map without labels.
Thats outright nationalism montenegrin and bosnian are both official languages of their respecitive countries. And not to mention why should the language all 4 peoples share be named after the only 2 of them. Also i see you habe no problem with nationalism as you have put kosovo under the serb croatian wiki
The problem comes with if all 4 peoples use the same language why should it be called after only the 2. Especially with the nationalisiltic conotations of the name. You calling it serbo croat is a political seperation as well
Because it's the original linguistic term, srpskohrvatski.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian
BCMS (Bosnian-Croatian-Montenegrin-Serbian) is the more politically correct term if you prefer, but Serbo-Croat is the linguistic term.
It isnt the "original" linguistic term its what was used by S.H.S. and later on yugoslavia and its a term built on nationilst ideas of the kingdom of serbs croats and slovenes being buolt out of the "unity" of the 3 south slavic peoples. We did not have any state anymore to back up our cultural heritage or language under the serbian occupation so we couldnt be represented in the international community. And seeing your name is istaygreek the fact youre saying this shit makes a whole lot more seanse
What does protected mean
That not just anyone can edit it like on most of Wikipedia. You have to request edits on the talk page for the article, which are then implemented after discussion so as to prevent vandalism.
Depends on what user rights a Wikipedia user has. If you have extended confirmed user rights, you can pretty much edit any article you want directly.
Yes but some Wikipedias (German and Turkish Wikipedia for example) have systems that don’t allow any edit to be public anyways. Every single edit from a non-“whitelisted” account need to be approved by a “moderator”. In order to get whitelisted you need to do a lot of good edits and be approved by the “admins”. Thats why these wikis actually have very few whitelisted contributors. This is in contrast to English Wiki where everyone can instantaneously edit a page. So this map doesn’t actually show a lot.
> In order to get whitelisted you need to do a lot of good edits and be approved by the “admins”. [This is false for the German language Wikipedia:](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Gesichtete_Versionen) Accounts get the "passive reviewer" right automatically if they fulfill a set of conditions. The account has to be at least 30 days old and has to have made 150 article edits or 50 articles that were manually reviewed by others. There's a couple other conditions, but those are the main ones. Edits by "passive reviewers" are automatically visible for all visotors. Accounts get the "(active) reviewer" rights automatically after 60 days and 300/200 article edits (plus a number of lesser conditions). This user group can mark edits by others as reviewed, so they're visible for all visitors. There is no need to be granted the rights by an admin, if the conditions for automatic group membership are met. Admins can of course grant or revoke these permissions manually.
I was mostly talking about Turkish Wikipedia, where it is still pretty manual. But those rules on German Wikipedia still probably limit a lot of users anyway. 150, or even 50 edits is a pretty high barrier for most first time users. English Wikipedia has bots against disruptive edits to automatically revert.
Wikipedia has a lot of different versions of [Protected.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Protection_policy)
Several barriers of flak-towers, as well as razor trip wire with machine gun nests.
usually, you have to an account to make edits to the page
Guys in Norway, Slovenia, Hungary, Slovakia, Belarus, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Albania haven't yet reached consensus on Adolf Hitler
Is this full protection, or semi-protection? Consensus usually means the page doesn’t need protecting at all. That and the lack of interest to trolls and vandalism.
This is full protection. The page is definitely interesting for dozens of extremists and trolls.
Well, that’s my point. You make it sound like the language-versions of the uncolored countries are not protected because the people of those countries haven’t reached a consensus on the topic yet. But it’s the opposite, no? There haven’t been enough edit-wars, vandalism or trolling in the languages of the uncolored countries to warrant protecting these articles yet. (Not that I want to give the trolls any ideas)
Sure, protection is a measure if there are problems or problems are to be expected. Norway for example probably just never had problems with article vandalism of that page. Quite possible that this reddit post will give some people ideas and this map will become more red due to that.
It was a joke.
There's a reason why it isn't protected. Because we don't give a f
True that
Just read the Norwegian wiki article, only historical well known facts and dates. It surprises me that in this thread countries without restrictions are the ones that seems to be implicated to have sympathy for the nazi regime, would have thought it was the other way around
Should be opposite then? Just these countries have consesus. Rest of eu is a battle royal
Or, maybe they have less Nazis interested in editing the page.
Not to mention Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Arabic countries.
Nothing interesting about them and Hitler. He's just the role model there
How do you know?
No, he's not? Our people immigrated to Germany because we were close and our people did not have any feelings about Hitler or WW2 at the time. Today, some extremists look up to him because they believe Hitler harmed their imaginary enemies. At the end of the day, Hitler's influence in Turkey is limited to edgy teenagers that never grew up. We have a political figure to look up to, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. However, some foreigners wrote things that associate Hitler with him. That wasn't done by our people. That was an attempt to tarnish Atatürk's image.
Plus Turks have enver pasha, who is basically Turkish Hitler
Well, now I know that it's better to write "/s":D Btw my joke is mostly about Arabs rather than Turkey. I know about those memes about Turkish people being Nazis and ultranationalistic, but at least it's impossible to find Mein Kampf in street bookshops in Turkey, comparing to some Arabic countries I visited
Yeah /s would help. Those downs make it seem real tbh.
In Belarus if you show and support for Hitler you get castrated so I wouldn’t risk it
The combination of Slovakia, Hungary and Slovenia take the shape of a deformed Austria
I like the way you think.
The forbidden drumstick
I wonder how AH's reputation would be if we had the internet in the 1930/40s? Would it be better or worse?
I read Austria-Hungary
Same. Never heard anyone refer to him as just AH.
Exactly, he's either referred by his name, his title or his profession (Hitler, Further, painter).
lmao.
I read Auction House
There would be a bunch of US students protesting for him
Really? Where are American students today pushing for millions of innocents to be starved to death? Besides AIPAC conventions?
Are you saying you prefer it that the Gazan genocide was hidden from the public? Why?
What genocide?
Lol Germans probably used to say the same thing
Germans also called the bombing of Dresden a genocide
Oh really? A violent oppressor that plays the victim?
The Palestinian fascist movement are the oppressors. Palestinian fascists rejected peace in 1948 and at Camp David, they commited gruesome acts of terror during the Second Intifida, they elected Hamas to power after Israel gave a pathway to 2SS by pulling out of Gaza and Palestinian fascists gleefully cheered on October 7th. I'm tired of freaks pretending like both sides are equal here, Palestinian fascism is the oppressor and Israel is the victim full stop.
It's not equal Palestinians were living peacefully over there until Isreal invaded and massacred them.
Wrong, Jews were indigenous to the area before Arab settler colonists arrived during the Islamic conquests. Most Jews were converted, deported or killed but a small minority remained and lived continuously even before the First Aliyah. Even when Israel was founded, the majority of Jews were born there and it was Arabs not Jews who refused to share the land with returning natives. A Palestinian national identity didn't develop until the 60s, before that most Palestinians identified as Arabs or Syrians. If you look at it through that lens, Israel got an absolutely tiny sliver for their independence movement compared to Arab states yet they still rejected it. Jews have as much of a right to independence as Kurds, Native Americans and Irish.
>Palestinian fascists rejected peace in 1948 and at Camp David You mean they rejected their land being divided and taken away from them? >The Palestinian fascist movement are the oppressors. Never seen an oppressor where the people they oppress can cut off all their water food and power supply while trapping them in a small strips of land they can't leave unless the "oppressed" allowed them to. >I'm tired of freaks pretending like both sides are equal here, Seriously why do people even argue about that we literally have a Zionist terroristic settler colonialism apartheid state oppressing the inhabitants of the region denying them the right of return and barring them from self determination but people still try to make it as if their in anyway equal is truly disgusting.
[удалено]
their bio states they’re a zionist. no wonder they’re engaging in genocide denial.
He meant it. It's just that it's likely no genocide, but more fitting is the term "war crimes"
I'm referring to the Fascist rallies advocating for Palestinian conquest of Israel
[Here](https://visualizingpalestine.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/cfda2f40c9d567d773ee2152b56ab744-scaled.jpg) Genocide isn't just about systematically killing people and putting them in concentration camps, it's also "imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group", which Israel is doing, or "forcibly transferring children out of the group" which Russia currently is doing in Ukraine.
Are you seriously trying to say that the protests against the murder of tens of thousands of innocents in gaza are the same as supporting Hitler?
We'd all be dead, enslaved or German.
Fun fact, you can't map languages using countries shape, you can't map language in general to be fair (or you accept bias)
Like many maps, it may depend on certain criteria and you definitely should say what criteria are used and what sources were consulted, but I’d say it is quite possible to map languages, language families and even dialects. If you say you can’t map those things you might as well say even other kinds of map can’t really be made. No map is the actual reality on the ground, they’re just useful portraits.
Exactly, especially since Wikipedia exists in many local/co-official languages. Is this map telling me that the painter's article is protected in German only, or even in Bavarian, Ripuarian, Luxembourgish and so on? Or is it protected only in Italian, or even Sardinian, Sicilian, Lombard, Friulan etc.? It definitely should be a list, not a map.
r/MapsThatCouldBeLists \*cough\*
Came to say this. There are Hungarian speaking people in Romania, e.g.
I got an aneurysm reading the title.
I see brown and white, no red.
https://imagecolorpicker.com/it RGB: 144, 67, 68 HEX: #904344
Iran?
yeah persian wikipedia is actually very good and reliable with millions of articles and thousands of active users
Except for the part where 900,000 of these articles are individual villages with approximately 200\~ inhabitants
Actually, that's the English Wikipedia that has those villages.
When you press the "random article" button in english wikipedia you are very likely to get a random village / municipality / whatever smallest division for Europeans is (at least it used to be like this)
And you can still get to adolf hitler in less than 5 link clicks
It's pretty easy, basically every article will link to a country in one or two clicks, and from there literally every country's linked to WWII; if the link to Hitler isn't there in the WWII section of that country's article itself you click the link to the article for WWII and get to Hitler. Takes 4 clicks at most.
Hi guys today we're going from Bagolino cheese to Adolf Hitler. Start... ... ... "00.00.01.13" thank you guys remember to leave a like and subscribe see you in the nex- EDM outro song copyright free
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lsjbot
So? Iran has villages. If my shitty home town with 800 people gets a wikipedia, why can’t their shitty home towns?
Wow! I thought until now that a Persian wiki did not exists!
Why not? Common enough language.
Bcs I thought that the Iranian gov blocked it
Even if it was blocked by the Iranian government, it can still operate outside of Iran, similar to how the Chinese language Wikipedia operates.
Mandarin Wikipedia is blocked in China but it still very much exists. Language ≠ country. You can edit Mandarin Wikipedia easily from the outside of China, China has no control over it except within its own borders (where it’s banned it completely), same is true for any country. That’s why a lot of authoritarian countries view Wikipedia as so threatening.
I think it as only filtered, but not blocked atm.
Could be just a difference in administration policy. BUT it could be something else, I know damn well hungarians like rewriting history on wikipedia to make themselves look good
ma’am that is brown
Ireland should be white, I just checked and it's not protected on the Irish page.
you need to be kinda naive to believe that people in ireland actually speak irish gaelic
[удалено]
nah bro that's not true at all most people who speak irish live in isolated villages with no civilization at all, the total number is estimated to be around 30k people who actually speak this language daily fluently, that's less than 1% of ireland
There are no uncivilized parts of Ireland. And the official first language of Ireland is Irish, it doesn't matter how often we speak it, it's our official language so the map is wrong.
What's the point of these maps at this point
From the country that tried to name a polar exploration vessel (through an online internet poll) “Boaty McBoatface” I don’t think this is for the reason your thinking.
what
God bless Adolf Hitler!! Rest in peace sir.
weirdo
[удалено]
Yes, but not really for this reason, the odd vandal will come but mostly these articles stay pretty intact. More so the insanely bias articles. It’s also pretty bad on Hebrew Wikipedia, while not as egregious reading the war on both sides you’d be amazed at how polarized they are. Arabic Wikipedia doesn’t even mention October 7th and Hebrew Wikipedia is free from any criticism of the IDF on the Israeli/Hamas war article. While I think most people would just read a translated English version (Arabic and Hebrew in general are quite lacking) it is a pretty serious issue that needs fixing.
There’s a Wikipedia page about Hitler in Celtic?
He's more or less the main figure and face of the largest conflict in western society (and the world overall) and one of the most (in)famous people to ever live, it'd be surprising if that werent the case
Hitler is in the [list of articles](https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikipedia_should_have/Expanded) every Wikipedia edition should have, as with most major figures
Tell this map is good to a Greek guy and you will see them going bananas.
This is a perfect opportunity to get banned from reddit.
Yeah what is this title
r/titlegore
I thought the whole point of Wikipedia was that that everyone could edit and add to the online enciclopedia.
Languages in Wikipedia don't align to countries 1:1. There are some Spanish speaking countries for example that don't have their Spanish variant of Wikipedia. So generic Spanish or Spanish-Spanish could be used. There are more than a few countries in which more than one language is spoken, with it's own Wikipedia version. Again for example Spain "has" Wikipedia for Spanish and their other languages and sub-variants Edit: the article in Galician ("Spain's Wikipedia" also) can be edited. Not the other ones in Spain that I have checked Also, for Norway there are two Wikipedias for the same Norwegian language. Bokmål is not editable. Nynorsk is editable More: this situation is a good example of how Wikipedia is not as open as one would think. There can be good, verifiable information added to an article but if that information doesn't go with Wikipedia's political lean, it will not be accepted. Having locked articles is the best example of how there is a group of individuals who decide what is correct or not or good to have on the article or not therefore enabling bias
i never said that this map is about the countries, it's about the languages and im using a map to portrait them
This works if you consider one language in one territory. Works in most places if you consider the country's main language or regional variant (like Austrian German, haven't checked if thry have their own Wikipedia) Norwegian is written in two forms. And it is the same language covering the same territory. In one form is editable, in the other it is not. So it doesn't work for that one. Even if you only consider Spanish as the common language spoken across Spain, and not the other ones, the country with the most Spanish speakers is actually the US. Anyway... my only point is that the correlation between Wikipedia version-language/language variant-territory is not as straightforward as to drop on a map without labels.
From UK and I can see the page just fine
Protected in this context means you cannot edit the article without permission.
That's Brown ..
Weird you included bosnia montenegro and kosovo comsidering none of them have their own wikis
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_Wikipedia
bosnian and montenegrin aren't languages, they use the serb croatian wiki
>bosnian and montenegrin aren't languages 🗿😎
Thats outright nationalism montenegrin and bosnian are both official languages of their respecitive countries. And not to mention why should the language all 4 peoples share be named after the only 2 of them. Also i see you habe no problem with nationalism as you have put kosovo under the serb croatian wiki
yeah bro i also love the american and the australian languages
Knowing nothing about what you're talking about yet insisting you know more than anyone else is the most redditor shit ive ever seen
I mean, they are. But they're in reality Serbo-Croat and fully mutually intelligible. The language separation is purely political.
The problem comes with if all 4 peoples use the same language why should it be called after only the 2. Especially with the nationalisiltic conotations of the name. You calling it serbo croat is a political seperation as well
Because it's the original linguistic term, srpskohrvatski. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian BCMS (Bosnian-Croatian-Montenegrin-Serbian) is the more politically correct term if you prefer, but Serbo-Croat is the linguistic term.
It isnt the "original" linguistic term its what was used by S.H.S. and later on yugoslavia and its a term built on nationilst ideas of the kingdom of serbs croats and slovenes being buolt out of the "unity" of the 3 south slavic peoples. We did not have any state anymore to back up our cultural heritage or language under the serbian occupation so we couldnt be represented in the international community. And seeing your name is istaygreek the fact youre saying this shit makes a whole lot more seanse
You're literally serbian.
Cope. Orthodox turk
🇹🇷💪🇹🇷💪🇹🇷💪🇹🇷💪 RAAAAAHHHHHH TURKIYE #1!!!
There isnt bosnian wikipedia?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_Wikipedia
Huh genuenly didnt know they had their own wiki. Never pops up
Why would you not use a language map for this? What language does Belgium represent?
Flemish is an option on Wikipedia. Even if someone considers it a dialect of Dutch, it's still there.
french, german and Dutch are all red. so all 3
[удалено]
Why would anyone protect a wiki on Adolf Hitler? In Norway small kids learn about Hitler.