This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Arts and Entertainment GA‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Bosnia and Herzegovina GA‑class High‑importance Ivo Andrić is part of the WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Bosnia and Herzegovina on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Bosnia and HerzegovinaWikipedia:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaTemplate:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaBosnia and Herzegovina GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Croatia GA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Croatia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Croatia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CroatiaWikipedia:WikiProject CroatiaTemplate:WikiProject CroatiaCroatia GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Serbia: Belgrade GA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Belgrade task force (marked as High-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Yugoslavia GA‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Yugoslavia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Yugoslavia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YugoslaviaWikipedia:WikiProject YugoslaviaTemplate:WikiProject YugoslaviaYugoslavia GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:Vital article

Why is this article in the "Overturned convictions" category? Although he was imprisoned for political reasons, no conviction is mentioned.Bill (talk) 03:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article explains that "In Yugoslav identity card issued in June 1951, Yugoslav government declared Andrić as Serb" -- all of the official paperwork regarding someone's identity, as well as ethnicity, was done in accord with that person, by filling the application forms by that particular person; stating the quoted, one could mistakenly came to think that Yugoslavia had a body of some kind, with discrete rights to arbitrarily "declare" someone's personal information, ethnicity, origin or beliefs, which wasn't the case in federal Yugoslavia. He was a corresponding member of the (Royal) Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts since 1926 and a full member since 1939 (http://www.sanu.ac.rs/English/Clanstvo/IstClan.aspx?arg=15), long before his international fame and Nobel prize (and there is a flow of not publishing this dates in the article). He was not in captivity, so there's no need to construct a dull tone regarding his free will decisions. Another written document regarding his nationality is Communist party application form, single-handedly written by I. Andrić. There's a marriage certificate and a quite a few other documents kept in his fund, proving the same. http://www.ivoandric.org.rs/html/body_vencani_list.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.139.202 (talk) 10:37, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also worth to mention the 1957 Yugoslav Who is Who in which he also declared himself a Serb. --Igor82 (talk) 11:45, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, so he legally changed his ethnicity from Croat in 1914 to Serbian in 1958? Didn't know that would be valid. Jackiechan321 (talk) 02:20, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it say in any credible historical reference that Ivo Andric was born to Serbian parents? Ivo Andric was born to Croatian parents Antun Andric and Katarina Pejic and brought up a Roman Catholic. Not to mention that his father's name Antun is not used by Serbs in the way it is spelt. Rather the Serbs use Antonije and Croats use Antun - equivalent to English Anthony!

see serbian name Antonije http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Антоније

See english http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_%28given_name%29 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.48.43 (talk) 01:20, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Andric was born ethnic Croat, I haven't heard his parents were Serbs. However he's Serb by choice and nobody denied that. He even didn't allowed his Croatian ethnic background to be mentioned in Yugoslav Encyclopedia. Also, the majority of his literal work belongs to Serbian literature. --N Jordan (talk) 02:11, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, but during his lifetime, there was no Croatia or Serbia, how can he be Serbian when it was Yugoslavia? You can't change ethnicity. Jackiechan321 (talk) 02:17, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well Andric was born in Travnik, then AH empire, does that make him Austian? When interviewed once, Andric said "One has to be born somewhere". Andric was born in catholic family but he is serbian writer since he wrote on serbian language and praized serbian literature. Since this crazy quoestion of ethnicity became so popular after Andrics death, Mesa Selimovic, next to Andric the best writer of that time in Yugoslavia, out of protest and shame that such a question was raised, publicly stated that he comes from Muslim family but his nationality is Serbian since he belongs to literature of Vuk Karadzic, Simo Matavul, Stevan Sremac, Borisav Stankovic, Petar Kocic, Ivo Andric. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Đorđe Batić (talk • contribs) 19:53, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not disputing that he chose to be a Serb later in life. However I did see an edit previously in the main article regarding his parents' supposed Serbian ethnicity - hence the question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.49.166 (talk) 12:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Ethnic Croat? Nope. See my post below.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 15:43, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• No, he was not an ethnic Croat. See

1977 William H. McNeill Canadian-American historian, Chicago University: "The family therefore lived poorly; and when the future writer was still an infant, his father died, leaving his peniless young widow to look after an only child. They went to live with her parents in Visegrad on the banks of the Drina, where the young Ivo grew up in an artisan family (his grandfather was a carpenter) playing on the bridge he was later to make so famous, and listening to tales about its origin and history which he used so skillfully to define the character of early Ottoman presence in that remote Bosnian town. The family was orthodox Christian, i.e. Serb; "

Source: Ivo Andric The Bridge on the Drina The University of Chicago Press, 1977 Introduction by William H. McNeil. pp. 3

1918 Ivo Vojnovic, Croatian writer: „Šaljem ti i djelo Ex ponto koje je probudilo veliku senzaciju. Pisac mladi Katolički Srbin iz Bosne, idealni mladić, Ivo Andrić, 26 god" Translation: "I'm sending the Ex ponto work to you, which (the work) was a great sensation. The writer is a young Catholic Serb, an ideal youth, Ivo Andrić, 26 year old"

Source: Profil profesionalnog čitatelja: čitateljske prakse Ive Vojnovića, Nada Topić, Sveučilište u Zadru, Poslijediplomski studij Društvo znanja i prijenos informacija link: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:zb11Ot2zS10J:hrcak.srce.hr/file/115521+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us pp. 13

--109.245.101.74 (talk) 15:08, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Claiming he is not a ethnic Croat shows bad faith. You can’t run away from your ethnicity. You can claim to be whatever you want and it can be mentioned in the article. But to be pure neurtal fact, his factual Croatian descent must be acknowledged. Tesla was quoted saying he is a “Croat” and proud of his “Croatian Homeland” but it’s irrelevant. Fact is he is an ethic Serb. Calling Andrić a “Catholic Serb” is inflammatory on multiple levels. It’s pathetic what lengths editors have gone to remove the Croatian ethnicity out of the intro as much as possible. He was an ethnic Croat who identified himself as a Serb. Simple. 74.101.190.2 (talk) 23:38, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can't run away from your ethnicity.^{[citation needed]} − your views seem to be strongly rooted in the 19th century. Anyway, per MOS:ETHNICITY, it is not normally stressed in the lead section, and should stay out for Andrić as well, whose ethnic background is rather complex to be described in a single sentence, and not a defining aspect of his life and works anyway. No such user (talk) 08:26, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How are my views “strongly rooted in the 19th century”? Yeah, citation for your claim definitely needed. Seems a bit accusatory without explanation. Turning this into some Balkan related nationalist conflict is a wasted approach here, chief. One can claim to be whatever they want to be, I’m not saying that is not to be acknowledged. But the reality of their origins is to be acknowledged as well as per NPV. I can claim to be French all I want as my ethnic heritage, but my actual Polish origin is objective fact regardless of my personal self reinventing. My issue was with a person above stating Ivo Andric’s ethnicity is not Croat at all. But I’m the one with a dated mindset. Sure. Acknowledging a person’s heritage is modernly done on many articles. It’s just being objective in a subjects description. Accepting reality is a timeless endeavor. Calling one a “Catholic Serb” definitely seems rooted in the “19th century”. You can objectively acknowledge a person’s background regardless of what they wish to identify as. This is done any oretty much every wiki article about a subject. Mentioning their heritage and also including what the subject identifies or declares themselves as if they did. This is typically done. That is what I meant by “can’t run away from ethnicity”. We can respect Andric’s self views but also the reality of his origins. I’m sure you would agree the same when dealing with Serbs who declare themselves as Croats. That when dealing with historical happenings, secondary sources will acknowledge aspects that the subject may not favor. Such as perhaps gender transitions, name changes etc. It’s not bad to do so. Just because a subject feels a certain way doesn’t make it an overall fact. If a Italian claims to be German, their Italian ethic background is still acknowledged and they are listed in Italians of Germany. Given that Ivo Andric contributed to Croatian literature as well, by your own link to the ethnicity wiki, it is relevant to state. It already is in the intro as a small [a] link. This all just seem to jarr with typical Wikipedia formatting is all I am really saying here. I hope you can empathize. As I’m sure you would agree if the shoe were on the other foot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.101.190.2 (talk) 11:13, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@74.101.190.2: The MOS is clear on this topic. If you want the page on Andrić to be an exception, you should probably take the discussion to Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Biography. And I would advise you to think more before you type, because you are writing a lot of incoherent nonsensical stuff. I personally do not see why the lead should not mention ethnicity, but you are going to need to up your game if you want to change guidelines. Good luck. Notrium (talk) 13:44, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Odd, you are telling me to “think before I type” and to “up my game” in communication, yet you belittle my reply as “incoherent nonsense”. A pretty much personal slight with no explanation as to how it is “nonsense”. (This goes against Wikipedia conduct). All the while ignoring the other editor claiming I “have views of that from the 19th century”. And having no issue with other editors pretty much denying any Croatian ethnic status all together. Comes across a bit biased. At least it seems that way at face value. Perhaps if you are struggling that much to understand my point that self determination of ethnicity doesn’t override secondary sourced backed ethnic origins, you could simply ask for clarification. I gave example scenarios that illustrated my point. (Eg. An ethnic Italian who revises their ethnicity as Austrian, for example, would still be, if secondary sources back up, an ethnic Italian individual). Their self determination would also be acknowledged but their actual origin ethnicity would still be noted. As is done in many articles. Not sure why that is an unclear point to grasp. You may disagree but that doesn’t make it nonsense. I understand your point of MOS and that I will have to look into. I am still learning the different template guidelines and such. But given your history of edits, warnings from others, and communication issue with other editors, I wouldn’t throw rocks in glass houses if I were you. Think about that before the next time YOU type and go that angle. Reflect on that a bit. I’m far from perfect, but who is even perfect? I don’t think I am the primary one that needs to “step up their game” as I doubt I would be greeted on the MOS page the way you two have greeted me here. Or have issue getting my point across as they likely don’t have potentially skin in the game (not directly specifically at you but on articles in general). Balkan pages often present that challenge though I see. Have a good one mate. And I mean that I will be mindful of MOS criteria moving on. I tried to be a clear as possible in this reply. 74.101.190.2 (talk) 21:32, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it that for the Nikola Tesla page, he is stated as Serbian not Austro-Hungarian but here Andric is Yugoslavian not Croatian? Going by ethnicity that is. Jackiechan321 (talk) 19:32, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tesla's page doesn't say he is "Serbian" or "Austro-Hungarian", but Serbian American (i.e. an American citizen of Serb ancestry) because he was a Serb who spent most of his life in America. "Yugoslav" doesn't pertain to ethnicity, but nationality (I also wouldn't mind seeing Tesla described as simply an American scientist in the intro to his article).

Andrić was a Croat born in Bosnia (who lived very shortly under Austria-Hungary) and spent most of his life in Belgrade, the capital of Serbia. In any case, he lived in Yugoslavia for much of his life and in later years refused to identify as a Croat. So as not to satisfy POV-pushers on any side, the article identifies him as a Yugoslav (which he was from 1918 on, including when he won the Nobel Prize). The "Early life" section clearly states his parents were Croats from Travnik. 23 editor (talk) 00:23, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes he was a Croat, so why not put that he is of Croatian decent? Are are agreeing with me. Jackichan1234 (talk) 18:55, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It would be interesting to know the religious makeup, diversity, of Višegrad during Ivo's upbringing.--Zoupan 11:36, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I'll get to it in a couple days. I'm still in the process of expanding the article. 23 editor (talk) 14:58, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ivo Andrić/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ɱ (talk · contribs) 14:24, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Will be starting this review shortly. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 14:24, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments:

• Infobox:
  • Did you like the expression in File:Andric Ivo.jpg more than in File:S. Kragujevic, Ivo Andric, 1961.jpg? The latter is a much better quality photo.
    • Yes, it show him head-on. Are there any problems with the licensing?
  • Can you interlanguage link his spouse? See below templates.
    • Done
      • The templates are normally used to indicate the change in language and indicate the article being missing from the English version. It really can throw off a reader how it is now. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 15:20, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, she's only notable for being married to him, so I've removed the link.

• In the lead:
  • Link South Slav?
    • Done
  • It states "After the war, he studied South Slavic history... . Between 1920 and 1941, he worked in the diplomatic service of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia." Did he study history while working in the diplomatic service? Before reading the details of the article, one would presume so based on this wording.
    • Fixed
      • Now I'm confused what " From 1920–23 to 1924–41," means. I usually take the hyphens to mean 'to', reading "from 1920 to 1923 to 1924 to 1941,"... ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 15:20, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As the article states, he was in the Foreign Ministry from '20 to '23, only to be forced to finish his doctoral studies. These lasted until the following year, at which point he resumed his diplomatic career. Any suggestions on how to make this clearer?

How about "From 1920–23 and again from 1924–41"?

• • I believe the English name for Na drini ćuprija should also be italicized.
    • Done
  • "The likes of" usually is used to refer to people similar to those listed, so I believe the idiom is misused. Perhaps use "over authors/people including" or something similar. The phrase is used again later in the body in the same way.
    • Altered
  • "the Belgrade apartment in which he spent much of World War II" sounds really clumsy in the sentence. Is there a better way to phrase this?
    • Rephrased
  • Wikilink, explain briefly, or explain in a note what an "ethno-town" is.
    • Still looking
• Early life:
  • I believe birth names are traditionally given in the lead and first sentence of the body; what prompted the use of Ivo and the explanatory note?
    • Done
  • What happened to former mentions of his birthplace as Dolac?
    • Added
      • You say here now that it's near Travnik, but it seems like it's in Travnik, right? ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 15:20, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's near the town of Travnik, but its located inside the municipality.

Then I'd recommend saying "near downtown Travnik" or "in Travnik", but I suppose I'm okay with it like it is too.

• • Mentioning Andric's father's death, you should either link the sentences with a semicolon or add 'at the time' at the end; otherwise they seem a bit disjointed.
    • Done
• Primary education:
  • I presume because he only had a three-year scholarship, he lost it for a time before repeating the sixth grade, even though it's stated after that?
    • I presume so as well, though the source doesn't go into details.
  • Please wikilink the two Croat instructors (looks like for one you need to use a template like {{ill}}, {{ill2}}, or {{ill-WD}})
    • Done
  • Can you link or explain "lyrical reflective prose"?
    • Done

• Student activism:
  • You should probably link or explain what "anti-Habsburg activities" are; you only mention Habsburg once before with barely more information linking it to Austria-Hungary.
    • Clarified
  • I don't think it would hurt to say "University of Zagreb in Croatia" and "University of Vienna in Austria"
    • Most people know where Vienna is, unlike Zagreb. I've linked Croatia-Slavonia and left Vienna as is.

• • Are there dates you can associate with Andric's illness or leaving Vienna?
    • Explained that he transferred to Vienna in 1913. The article already says he transferred to Krakow in early 1914. Hawkesworth doesn't provide any specific dates.
  • "For a time, Andrić had considered transferring to Russia" should be changed to "a school in Russia" or something similar.
    • Done

More to come. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 15:53, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• The World War I section looks fine, although the image subject is disputed and therefore the caption suffers. Perhaps consider uploading this CC BY image of the church of St Mihovil in Ovčarevo. Apparently there's also a bust of Andric there now.

How do we know it's PD? 23 editor (talk) 21:07, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The host, Panaramio, has a sidebar on the right, "Photo details" that includes the Creative Commons symbol along with "Attribution". Click the symbol and it details it as Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0). ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 01:59, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• • • By dispute, I presume you are referring to the fact it likely doesn't show Princip. This is irrelevant since it's still the most famous photo of the assassination and is meant to illustrate the event/aftermath, as the caption would suggest.
      • There should be no interest in how famous the photo is. It's not an article on the assassination, and that article already has the photo. The fact that the photo could be of the arrest of a bystander, and doesn't even clearly show anything, and cannot have a better explanatory caption than "aftermath pictured" is very weak. The photo I suggest is a very worthwhile alternative of a more obscure subject. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 15:20, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Interwar:
  • "and was back in hospital" in sentence 3 should have a "the" or something similar before "hospital". Perhaps say "back in hospital care"?
    • "back in hospital" sounds fine in my neck of the woods, but I've changed it nevertheless
  • This first paragraph leaves me a lot of questions - what happened to Vojnovic's two appeals, were they even responded to? What happened to his uncle?
    • Hawkesworth offers no explanation as to what happened with Vojnović's appeals, only saying Andrić took matters into his own hands. His uncle's fate is explained under "Advancement"
  • I wouldn't link figs, they're common fruit.
    • Done
• Early diplomatic career:
  • If you're sticking with American English (that's what it looks like), change "meagre" to "meager". And although all the rest of the writing is in American style, the dates aren't in American MDY style?
    • Canadian English actually. Some words we use the British spelling (meagre, colour, etc.) and others we use American (realize, materialize, etc.) Canada also uses DMY for the most part (in government documents, etc.)
• Advancement:
  • "all civil servants, especially those in the Foreign Ministry, had to have a doctoral degree" is confusing. If all civil servants needed degrees, how did Foreign Ministry servants especially need them? Either you need them or you don't, you can't 'especially need them', right?
    • Removed
• World War II:
  • How did Andric help Polish prisoners?
    • Source doesn't go into detail (see below)
  • Andric was forced to leave the friend's apartment and evacuate the city, but that was merely temporary? The apartment he later stayed in during further bombing was the same? ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 15:56, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Same apartment, he was under de facto house arrest so his movement was restricted under normal circumstances.
• Later life:
  • The caption should make clear where Andric is in the photo
    • Done
  • The second paragraph has a great many sentences starting with "In [month] [year],". Consider placing some dates at the end of the sentences, and/or saying "in the following year"
    • Done
  • Link the 1950 sentence with the next sentence; you can just replace the period with a semicolon.
    • Done
• Nobel Prize:
  • Here the caption note "right" isn't really needed. Their genders should be easily identifiable from the photograph
    • Removed
  • link AVNOJ
    • Done
• Influences:
  • There should be an "and" before "British writers" in the list in the first paragraph here
    • Done
• Legacy:
  • Is the name of the mentioned committee given? It's given four sentences, but isn't mentioned by name?
    • Done (if I understood correctly)
  • I'll want to review the references later, though I notice here that you cite Google Maps for the existence of those streets. Perhaps Maps can verify that streets are named "Ive Andrica", but there are many other people who share his surname. You really should find a reference that mentions these streets being named after him, or they should be removed.
• That's all except references and images. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 18:34, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comprehensive review, Ɱ. I'll get to your comments tomorrow because I have some business to attend to today. 23 editor (talk) 21:44, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All of the images look fine except File:1914 Miljacka Sarajevo.png and File:Andric Ivo.jpg. For the first one, in order for it to be Public Domain in the US, it needs to have been published before 1923 (other qualifications can apply). The book the image is taken from was published in 2006, and makes no note of the image's copyright status. It does however mention on page 76 that it was borrowed from the Historical Museum in Sarajevo. Perhaps inquire to them or search around for further copyright information. Alternatively, find a verified free image. As well, you'll need to make sure the image is compliant with Bosnia and Herzegovina's copyright laws (which I'm not familiar with); it would also need a copyright tag for that country. For the second image, please find archive urls or other sources as the urls given aren't functioning. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 23:14, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You use Citation Style 1 in your Works cited section, though CS1 uses accessdates (read here). I would add those access dates to any urls given.

For Rakić 2000, you list pages 81-91 in the works cited and notes. I would remove one of those instances, but it would also be good to have more specific page numbers to support that "most Bosniak criticism...appeared...immediately before the breakup of Yugoslavia".

The last external link doesn't work. It's odd that different archive dates for the same link work, so perhaps consider either not using the template, or talking to the template author that contrary to what the template says (that the date works with all of the authors), it won't work with Andric and that perhaps the template can be adjusted. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 18:04, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@23 editor: It seems like that's it. When the above is fully addressed (I see you already worked on some), I'll be happy to pass this. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 18:25, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• As noted in the main talk page, this article contains no list of works by the author. It is standard in literary biographies to list works in a section titled "Works" or "Bibliography". Obviously a complete bibliography is beyond the scope, but something at least as complete as seen in Books and Writers (see talk page) for it to be a complete article. -- GreenC 17:34, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, prose issues addressed. Some things to clarify:

1. An ethno-town or ethno-village is basically an attraction designed to look like the stereotypical (or idealized) setting where members of a particular religious/national/ethnic group live (or once lived). If you're from the US, imagine a faux-Civil War tourist town in the South with civil war re-enactors in period dress, etc. You get the picture. Unfortunately, since the term "ethno-town/village" is of relatively recent date, none of the major or minor dictionaries carry a definition, so my above explanation would fall under WP:OR if included in the article on its own.
2. Re: U of Vienna. Most people know where Vienna is, unlike Zagreb. I've linked Croatia-Slavonia and left Vienna as is.
3. Explained that he transferred to Vienna in 1913. The article already says he transferred to Krakow in early 1914. Hawkesworth doesn't provide any specific dates.
4. His uncle's fate is explained under "Advancement"
5. Hawkesworth says that Vojnović appealed orally, followed by Andrić's written appeal.
6. Canadian English actually. Some words we use the British spelling (meagre, colour, etc.) and others we use American (realize, materialize, etc.) Canada also uses DMY for the most part (in government documents, etc.)
7. Same apartment. He was de facto under house arrest so that explains a lot.
8. Hawkesworth doesn't say exactly how, re: Polish prisoners. All she says is that he tried but wasn't successful.
9. No one has ever called me out for using Google Maps (FA's use it, such as Oerip Soemohardjo). Also, Ivo Andrić is the only person by that name that is of any significance in the former Yugoslavia. So the idea that this Andrić could be mistaken for another one doesn't hold much water. 23 editor (talk) 01:16, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if all of the prose issues have been addressed. I'd really like if you could indicate what you did within my above bullets (as sub-bullets) so I don't have to pick through all your edits. As for the comments you wrote today, it would also be much easier to respond if they were paired with what they're in response to... Anyway, if "ethno-town" is such a neologism that it doesn't appear to have a citable definition (I looked as well), then I would strongly recommend either explaining it in a note or using a common term in conventional usage that's also more intuitive, such as "living-history museum" (used on the Colonial Williamsburg page) or "Open-air museum".

The FA you mention was passed in 2012 without very many people actually critiquing. I'm skeptical of that, and would not believe it would pass based on current standards. However based on what you say of Andric, I'm not very concerned.

Thanks for your responses, I'll reply further soon. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 01:38, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• As previously noted, the article contains no list of works by the author. -- GreenC 02:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this definitely should be included. ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 02:18, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ɱ: Bullet-point addressed. I'm still looking for the textbook definition of ethno-town. 23 editor (talk) 18:49, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ɱ: Defined ethno-town. What do you think? 23 editor (talk) 01:49, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to four more things inline. The only other outstanding comments were about the two photos and the absence of access dates. Also I saw you removed the two external links recently. Why? ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 15:20, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the external links because they either contained a bibliography (which the article now has) or because they are already used as references, hence to avoid over-linking. 23 editor (talk) 21:07, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for being late to reply; I don't think people mind if there's another biography, it's not overly redundant. And having them already as references - most people don't look at all the references, but external links are the main secondary sources people look to for more information here. I think the links to the Nobel Foundation and to Andric's website are most appropriate and beneficial. Most biographies will have links to their subject's official website (if they have one), and the same goes for many Nobel laureates. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 01:59, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded the photo. Is there anything I've overlooked, Ɱ? 23 editor (talk) 18:08, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@23 editor: Okay, thanks. I hope this'll make going to FA easier too. Passing. All the best, ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 18:47, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't thinking of taking it to FA, but nonetheless, thanks for the comprehensive and thorough review. Best, 23 editor (talk) 18:49, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Petri Liukkonen. "Ivo Andrić". Books and Writers.

..Contains an extensive bio and bibliography. It keeps getting removed so adding it here for discussion and/or making it available for readers who seek additional sourcing. Notably, this Wikipedia article contains no list of works (bibliography) by the author. To fill in this gap the linked source contains a list of major works, plus a literary history. -- GreenC 17:32, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This clause is far too contentious to be included in the intro as a fact. For example, it took me a single google search to find this article in Vijenac #482 (2012) - http://www.matica.hr/vijenac/482/Izazovan%20poziv%20na%20%C4%8Ditanje%20Andri%C4%87a%20/ - that tells a completely different story - saying he was omitted from being listed as part of Croatian literature both during Yugoslavia and after its breakup, based on the same kinds of strict nationalist views, but also that his rehabilitation started with the breakup. This is also what I remember from primary and secondary school education in Croatia. The discussion of this topic should also include more nuanced modern-day analyses such as the one at http://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=98052 so it seems to me that these kinds of sweeping generalizations should definitely be removed from the intro as they would mislead readers about what's actually been going on in the last 25 years. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 11:17, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Andrić was undoubtedly a persona non grata during the Tuđman years, as stated in several sources. Examples:

• "Franjo Tuđman ... who promoted "blood and soil" narratives, against Slobodan Šnajder, Ugrešić, Drakulić and Ivo Andrić..." (Cornis-Pope et al. )
• "Primary targets were books written in the Cyrillic alphabet and books written by left-wing authors, Serbs, or pro-Yugoslavs, such as Ivan Cankar, Ivo Andrić..." (Vjekoslav Perica )

There's a few more, which I'll add if requested. However, if there has been a rehabilitation in the past 15 years, then I don't see why this evolution of opinions should not be included in the intro. Best, 23 editor (talk) 16:55, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then the core issue is what is really meant by "literary establishment"? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 17:49, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some adjustments. Feel free to expand on developments regarding Andrić in the past 15 years. The liberal, democratic left in Croatia obviously re-emerged following Tuđman's death (though the right is clearly experiencing something of a renaissance today) and I agree it would be unfair to present something from a decade-and-a-half ago as a modern occurrence. 23 editor (talk) 20:16, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

::Looks good, Joy, just add a page number if possible. 23 editor (talk) 16:07, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The journal has a print edition with a page number, but I only read the online version. So long as we don't mix up ISSNs of the two editions, we should be fine? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:17, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This statement

According to the scholar Guido Snel, Serbs consider Andrić "one of the greatest non-Serb-born Serbs".[72]

is false. There are two sources proving the opposite

1977 William H. McNeill Canadian-American historian, Chicago University: "The family therefore lived poorly; and when the future writer was still an infant, his father died, leaving his peniless young widow to look after an only child. They went to live with her parents in Visegrad on the banks of the Drina, where the young Ivo grew up in an artisan family (his grandfather was a carpenter) playing on the bridge he was later to make so famous, and listening to tales about its origin and history which he used so skillfully to define the character of early Ottoman presence in that remote Bosnian town. The family was orthodox Christian, i.e. Serb; "

Source: Ivo Andric The Bridge on the Drina The University of Chicago Press, 1977 Introduction by William H. McNeil. pp. 3

1918 Ivo Vojnovic, Croatian writer: „Šaljem ti i djelo Ex ponto koje je probudilo veliku senzaciju. Pisac mladi Katolički Srbin iz Bosne, idealni mladić, Ivo Andrić, 26 god" Translation: "I'm sending the Ex ponto work to you, which (the work) was a great sensation. The writer is a young Catholic Serb, an ideal youth, Ivo Andrić, 26 year old"

Source: Profil profesionalnog čitatelja: čitateljske prakse Ive Vojnovića, Nada Topić, Sveučilište u Zadru, Poslijediplomski studij Društvo znanja i prijenos informacija link: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:zb11Ot2zS10J:hrcak.srce.hr/file/115521+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us pp. 13

--109.245.101.74 (talk) 14:56, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've added whole section to Serbian language version of this biography elaborating Andric's personal opinion about his ethnicity and perception of his ethnicity coming from scholars who were his friends or contemporaries.--Vujkovica brdo (talk) 15:45, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is the original source from Guido Snel saying "...non-Serb-born Serbs" or "...non Serbian-born Serbs"? FkpCascais (talk) 21:44, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]