Login
Login

Talk:White Croats#Consensus in bibliography

{{Talk header|search=yes}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=

{{WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina|importance=Mid}}

{{WikiProject Croatia|importance=Mid}}

{{WikiProject Rusyns|importance=Mid}}

{{WikiProject European history|importance=mid}}

{{WikiProject Ethnic groups|importance=mid}}

{{WikiProject Middle Ages|importance=mid}}

{{WikiProject Anthropology|importance=Mid|oral-tradition=yes}}

{{WikiProject Ukraine|importance=Mid}}

{{WikiProject Poland|importance=Mid}}

{{WikiProject Czech Republic|importance=mid}}

}}

{{Contentious topics/talk notice|topic=b}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config

| algo = old(90d)

| archive = Talk:White Croats/Archive %(counter)d

| counter = 2

| maxarchivesize = 100K

| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}

| minthreadstoarchive = 1

| minthreadsleft = 2

}}

religious arab sources

any mention of or reference to religious arab sources should be stated as controversial, tentative and unreliable - and the narrative should be framed from the perspective of the indigenous slavs, not the imperialistic and invading (and expelled and unwanted) arabs

i have removed an entire paragraph because it's so biased as to be unsalvageable. it looks like it was written by an imam, and not an academic or a historian.

any mention of or reference to religious arab sources should be stated as controversial, tentative and unreliable - and the narrative should be framed from the perspective of the indigenous slavs, not the imperialistic and invading (and expelled and unwanted) arabs.

there is a serious problem with fundamentalist muslims using wikipedia as a tool of propaganda to distort history for their geopolitical ambitions. i am drawing attention to this, but i cannot fix it by myself, in the presence of overwhelming resources dedicated to the cause.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.190.102.49 (talk) 8 March 2022 (UTC)