Image talk:Princely Standard of Danilo I of Montenegro.png

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I can't believe what more I'll see from Imbris...I guess that now you'll also claim that the flag of Serbia is a black eagle on blue background? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

A clarification for the non-understandable comment to the up: this erroneous flag was uploaded by User:Imbris, who then changed the color of the double-headed eagle from white to yellow. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Sources for that historical re-creation lay deap in the Montenegrin culture and as the matter of fact in the Museum in Cetinje. -- Imbris (talk) 23:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

OMG, Danilo's standard was a WHITE EAGLE on RED BACKGROUND. Come to me and Ill show you the Museum of Cetinje! PPNjegos (talk) 12:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

You speak of the war flag and not the princely flag. -- Imbris (talk) 00:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

A, no. There is no such thing. Danilo had used just one standard. Of course, he placed it in front of his house after Montenegro became a state in 1852, during the time he was searching for a Flag for his country (a tricolor). PPNjegos (talk) 21:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

It is very strange to see that you know best like your friend Pax. But have you really been in front of his house in 1852. Or this is just another Saint Sava myth, legend, tale, figment, fairy tale, fable, ... Stop preaching without any fact. I have supplied facts why couldn't you do the same. -- Imbris (talk) 22:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Imbris, it is obvious that you have a very large inherent POV regarding Montenegrins and Serbs. Please refrain from expressing such words again.

What is your source for this?

P.S. I'd also like to remind you about this. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It is very strange to receive such harsh comments. This is not setting the discussion in a normal tone. PPNjegos is slandering so I answered properly. -- Imbris (talk) 19:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

What does this have to do with PPNjegos?

P.S. You still haven't stated what is your source. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Stop your claims that no sources exist. Everything has been written in the file's description. -- Imbris (talk) 23:42, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry but your alleged sources are not viewable. There is no way to view them on(line on) the internet, nor did you scan that book's page. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, I still didn't hear your clarification. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] It is funny that you ask for sources when there are a bunch of them all over the Internet

You have http://www.rbvex.it/montenegro.html by Roberto Breschi who received help from Diego Bonazzi and Valentina Velimirović. Also http://www.fotw.net/flags/me_ks.html by Mario Fabretto and official http://www.montenegro.yu/english/podaci/symbols.htm (on the symbols of the past entirely). The Montenegrin Football Association also use this colour (pink/light purple/purple) for their goal-keeper's dress.

http://www.worldstatesmen.org/Montenegro.html Benjamin M. Cahoon page by the way this author is inclined to continue Yugoslavia as Serbia.

Imbris (talk) 23:48, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Your 3rd source doesn't present that, and there is no primary source, just one claim that has spread across the internet, quite outrageously changing the color from violet to red. You have insisted on scanned pages, so I shall do so myself here. BTW, isn't that eagle white? :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

It is obvious that nothing can be enough and correct for you. Your Cetinje Monastery flag has not any source. Serbian Empire flag is not just second hand but it is based on fairy tales. Yes you presented sources but those sources have no sources. I have presented (concerning this particular flag) my sources - if you are not satisfied write to Switzerland and prove to all these people that they are wrong. I will not endulge your request because these sources are enough to pass any critical analysis. Primary source is located at every of those pages (sources) that I listed. It is the Historical Museum of Montenegro. -- Imbris (talk) 00:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

No it isn't - because I don't want double standards over here. You have used the right to bug me with every single tiny thing (though you continued to dispute it even afterwards), are you now saying that I am using this to annoy you? Or perhaps you don't like when I act like you? :) If you do not indulge my request, I will consider this your personal opinion of superiority on your part and inferiority of mine - a no-no.

Interesting...Angelino Dulcert early 14th century was not living and breathing, but a fairy tale? :)

That is false. The Historical Museum of Montenegro is not a source for this alleged flag.

P.S. You still haven't explained your self regarding that outrageous accusation. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 09:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Stop preaching on sources when it is obvious that it is not sources that interest you. You are interested in playing with this topic. So play. I am sure that no admin would grant you the right to harrass users just because you are not happy about the sources. Also I am sure that no admin would delete the properly described file that could be found on various internet hosts with people standing with their name and surname for those contents.

Angelino draw a medieval map and not a flag, that is a fabrication of the Markuš and Solovjev. It will on the long run damage the Nation on behalf you work in many ways to kling to the past myths and you know about the famous citation of Dobrica Ćosić about lying and stuff. -- Imbris (talk) 23:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I think youre the one who is harrassing Pax and not the other way around - you are never happy with sources, deny him the right to put them - and when he scans, you disregard them simply because of your personal opinion of disliking them. Its horible how admins actually alow THIS.

So, all Serbs, all Medieval experts, regardless of ethnic origin, are laing because they dont support your personaly ideology wich you must yourself admit, is aimed as a very huge dislike of Serbs and Montenegrins?

You cant even begin to imagine, how INSANE this flag looks to me, as a Montenegrin. I dont think you are competent enough regarding the mater, since you ACTUALLY CLAIM that it existed. Im inviting another user to show you. PPNjegos (talk) 08:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, calm down PPNjegos, I know how this must be frustrating to you - but we can solve this in an easy and calm manner. Let us let Imbris scan his sources and upload them, then we'll see. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 09:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I have no need to justify my sources further than is expected by Wiki standards. If FotW is a reliable source for most of the community it will have to do. Also Pax and his scans can be subject to critical analysis, not everybody should agree with his sources, yet as I recall the motion for deletion was removed from the list. The time will come for such sources to undergo a more critical historical analysis, like Panonian works. -- Imbris (talk) 21:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

This is not true, since FotW also claims that the Flag of the Kingdom of Serbia was a red double-headed eagle on a golden background - or do I need to remind you that you actually accused Soloviev and Markus (!) for fabricating them? I don't really understand, does this mean that you take a selective approach at sources - or not? Also, are you actually aware that at yet another image you claim the bicephallic eagle was golden - when FotW itself claims it was only silver? :) How do you explain this? These double standards - if they are so - are shocking to me.

I do not think that an Italian book is as worthy as other domestic sources; especially since every single living Montenegrin is certain that this flag has never ever existed. It is only worthy of you to scan and upload the pages - I for one part do not trust online sources, so for justifying the flag of the Serbian Kingdom you so heavily pushed to delete - and which you still claim is a fabrication - I rather went to the library and scanned and uploaded the pages in question. But since you won't do that, I'll go and acquire the book. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

P.S. - I just checked your other source. I missed it at first, but it also doesn't back up your claims. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It does, after Danilo came Nikola and inherited in the first period this flag. Same thing is war flag of Danilo and war flag of NIkola. -- Imbris (talk) 23:41, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. If you can see, the Red is depicted as pink in the tricolor, same as with the banner. Please respond fully to this up and not make me wait a long time and then revert to attract your attention. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

You have presented the following 4 sources to substantiate your claim:

SOURCE NUMBER 1: Roberto Breschi. To the up you had claimed he is the source for this flag, helped to be created by Diego Bonazzi and Valentina Velimirović. There is nothing such in the link, claim disproven.

SOURCE NUMBER 2: The official website of the Republic of Montenegro on Montenegrin national symbols. However, when the link is observed, there is nothing related to this matter; claim disproven.

SOURCE NUMBER 3: You claimed that this was the color of the Montenegrin National Football team's goalkeeper. Patent nonsense to be applied as a source.

SOURCE NUMBER 4: A. Ziggioto Armi e bandiere del Montenegro: molte ombre e poche luci, Archivum Heraldicum. The reconstruction was made in 1998 by Mario Frabrinetti. It doesn't support this flag; claim disproven.

So all in all, you have falsely claimed two sources and even presented patent nonsense as yet another one. Your sole real source doesn't even present this flag - and nevertheless, you have yet to scan and upload it for confirmation. Can you actually believe what you wrote? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 09:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)