Talk:Victory Day (Croatia)

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on 11 dates. [show]

August 5, 2006, August 5, 2007, August 5, 2008, August 5, 2009, August 5, 2010, August 5, 2018, August 5, 2020, August 5, 2021, August 5, 2022, August 5, 2023, and August 5, 2024

Croatia Low‑importance

	Croatia portal 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Culture / Memorials / Balkan / European C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military culture, traditions, and heraldry task force
	Military memorials and cemeteries task force
	Balkan military history task force (c. 500–present)
	European military history task force

"obliterated"

'obliterated' thats an emotive and bombastic word which is unnecessary... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.198.239.46 (talk) 09:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. GregorB (talk) 14:42, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Serbia and Republika Srpska

I have removed what seemed to be good-faith edits regarding what happens on August 5th in Serbia and Republika Srpska. This information is true and tangentially connected, but not in this article - they expressly don't celebrate a "victory day", nor do they do a mock celebration of any sort, they stage a separate set of events that address a different aspect of Operation Storm. Because this article is not about that operation in general, but instead about a specific public holiday in a specific jurisdiction, the mourning in a separate jurisdiction is not suitable for this specific article. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 11:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is relevant in the same manner as in the article about Yom Ha'atzmaut is relevant the sentence others regard it as a tragic day in their history and call it al-Nakba ("the catastrophe"). In the same manner is relevant this (In 1914, Nicholas II celebrated the 50th anniversary of the defeat of the Circassians as one of the empire's greatest victories.) sentence in this article.

Actually, the former is a reference to a separate article Nakba Day which makes it all right in my view. You probably wouldn't want the contents of those two articles merged, because it would be a mess. Now, this isn't really an invitation to create a novelty article - Operation Storm#Later events should be a suitable place to place a reference to both sets of events. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 13:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, if there are some relevant Croatian organizations in Bosnia and Herzegovina (or elsewhere), which are celebrating this event at the same day, it should be included in this article as relevant. Even if it is tied to a specific jurisdiction, we would mention that it transcends boundaries of that jurisdiction. So, since the jurisdiction issue is not an obstacle, and you agree that it is true and (tangentially) connected, I will return that sentence in the article. I agree though that this article needs to be significantly expanded, so that this one sentence wouldn't take the such significant portion of the article. -- Obradović Goran (ta^lk 15:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The holiday is a commemoration for the thousands who have served in the war and a day to reflect one of the biggest symbolic victories of the war. Although it is obviously connected with the losing forces presently in Serbia, such an obvious politically-oriented thing should not be in the article. Especially with those terrificly inflated numbers as "sources". --Jesuislafete (talk) 05:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I actually don't think it would be appropriate to include any BiH celebration, because it's likely inconsequential. Indeed, this separate article as such probably gives the event undue weight, but since it's customary for public holidays list articles to include links to articles about each particular holiday, this is just following suit. There isn't much factual, encyclopedic content to be recorded about this holiday. We could keep a log of which politician said what in their address each year, or e.g. how some group occasionally decides to boycott the official celebration, but that in turn would give undue weight to those things, too. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 13:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just added Operation Storm#Remembrance. Neither event was previously mentioned there, d'oh. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 13:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BiH has nothing to do with this article either. It is not a holiday in that country. This is a simple information page on the holiday, just like Christmas, Statehood Day, and Anti-Fascist Struggle Day. If political wrangling is allowed to happen on this page, what is stopping the same thing to happen on other pages? To me, this just seems like an emotional edit. --Jesuislafete (talk) 21:18, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]