Talk:Serbian State Guard/Archive 1

Archive 1

Philip Cohen's 'Serbia's Secret War

According to RSN discussion Philip Cohen's 'Serbia's Secret War is not reliable source.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:59, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

according to one editor, (User:Fifelfoo). That is not consensus. RSN states "While we attempt to offer a second opinion, and the consensus of several editors can generally be relied upon, answers are not official policy". There was no consensus of several editors, and it certainly isn't official policy. Your tagging of this whole article on the basis of Cohen, whose reliability you personally dispute, is just disruptive and blatant POV warring. Continuation of this approach beyond the currently affected article (Djurisic) where you don't have a consensus, will be reported as disruption. Peacemaker67 (talk) 09:01, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dank (talk · contribs) 03:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'll have a look at this in the morning. - Dank (push to talk) 03:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

• "Higher SS and Police Leader": It's generally better to link an entire proper noun: Higher SS and Police Leader (here and also in the text)
• "As part of its role, it assisted the Germans to impose ...": Omit the first part: "It assisted the Germans in imposing ..."
• "a military government. This was due to the key rail ...": a military government, to exploit the key rail ...
• "(Serbo-Croatian: Vlada Nacionalnog Spasa, Влада Националног Спаса)": The question here is whether the reader is likely to know this is supposed to be Serbo-Croatian ... since you mention it in the lead, they probably will know (and you omit mention of the language later on), so omit "Serbo-Croatian" here.
• "five regions (oblast)": Okay, my Serbo-Croatian is a little rusty :) But isn't oblast singular? It should be plural here. Likewise for "three districts (okrug)".
• "It was royalist in sympathy, pro-Chetnik, and was rapidly infiltrated by Chetniks loyal to Draža Mihailović, did not have enough officers, and after some initial successes, was never an effective military force.": That could be clearer.
• "executing or delivering to the Germans for execution people from those groups": executing people from those groups or delivering them to the Germans for execution
• "the SDS had reduced": the SDS had been reduced, or declined
• "the 'worst troops in the world'.": double quote marks
• "the either the": either the
• Alphabetize the book references.
• I'm not the best on whether this covers "major aspects", but my understanding is that will be covered at A-class.
• The "toolbox" above reports no problems.
  • Thanks Dan. All addressed. You might like to check that my sentence structure and grammar changes are up to snuff. Thanks for the review! Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
    • Happy to help. Your edits check out, and I made three tweaks ... have a look. I'm going to look at a few other articles before signing off on "major aspects". - Dank (push to talk) 13:28, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
      • Copy. PRODUCER jumped in and made a couple of syntax tweaks, all edits ok with me.Peacemaker67 (send... over) 23:01, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

• Otherwise:

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:  Yes

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:  Yes

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:  Yes

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:  Yes

   C. No original research:  Yes

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:  Yes

   B. Focused:  Yes

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:  Yes

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:  Yes

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  Yes. Images are good.

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  Yes

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: Pass. - Dank (push to talk) 02:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Dan! Peacemaker67 (send... over) 02:16, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Attack on Tuzla

"In early December 1944, the SUK participated, along with other Chetnik formations, in an unsuccessful attempt to capture the city of Tuzla". Not a big deal, but attack on Tuzla was actually on 24-28 December.--Gorran (talk) 06:17, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

could you provide a source for that please? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 06:28, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

For example, Ahmet Đonlagić: Dvadeset sedma divizija, pp. 341-383. Mihailović's group started advance on 8 December, on 10 December Heeresgruppe E OK informed own units of Četniks advancing in direction Rogatica - Zvornik - Valjevo (p. 345, also KTB HGE OK), 17 December Četniks took Vlasenica (p. 364). In the meantime 16. East Bosnian Brigade NOVJ cleared German rear guards out of Drinjača 16 December (p. 357-363, also KTB HGF OK), and turned against Četniks. Četniks were beaten badly near Šekovići on 22 December (pp. 364-371), and then they turned their direction towards Tuzla. Četnik HQ ordered attack on Tuzla on 23 December (p. 372). Clashes in the outer parts of Tuzla lasted from 24 to 28 December, and četniks were thrown to Ozren mountain(pp. 372-383). But, not really a material for this article. Regards!--Gorran (talk) 07:41, 30 May 2014 (UTC)