Talk:Government of Croatia

title

I think the title "Croatian Government" is better because it's more often used, and neither that nor "Government of Croatia" matches the original title anyway. --Shallot 12:50, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It's Goverment of the Republic of Croatia: http://vlada.hr/en — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.2.86.179 (talk • contribs) 21 January 2012

Important notice

The government section of the "Outline of Croatia" needs to be checked, corrected, and completed -- especially the subsections for the government branches.

When the country outlines were created, temporary data (that matched most of the countries but not all) was used to speed up the process. Those countries for which the temporary data does not match must be replaced with the correct information.

Please check that this country's outline is not in error.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact The Transhumanist .

Thank you.

22 May 2009‎

Assessment comments

Here are some comments regarding the article quality assessment:

• Intro. Probably too long - approximately 25% of article prose. The paragraph on history is almost equally long as the history section itself, so there's certainly room to expand the latter and condense the former.
• Powers. Needs to be slightly expanded to cover all significant points in the Government of the Republic of Croatia Act and the Constitution itself (§108-117). Most of it is there, though.
• Perhaps Local government in Croatia (of Croatia?) might receive a mention. No main article at the moment, though - not sure on this one.
• I'm also not sure on whether to describe in summary style what government ministries do (probably not - it's self-describing anyway). Some government agencies might receive a mention nevertheless. E.g. HIDRA is one such agency that is used as a source, but is probably not notable by itself. But e.g. Croatian Bank for Reconstruction and Development (HBOR) is notable, surely there are others.
• Of course, an update is pending on the outcome of the 2011 election. Images might be added at this time too.
• Layout and referencing look good.

Overall, I'd say C class (perhaps I'm being a little bit strict here, in line with the WP:CL-RULE), but easily upgradable to B class, and already ahead of nearly all national government articles. With some rounding out, obviously a GA candidate. GregorB (talk) 18:22, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. As far as the intro/history length is concerned, I feel this might be best remedied tightening the lead a bit and expanding the body text as suggested, and I'll get to that right away. I'm not sure about the local government, perhaps it should get its own article (or a short section in the Administrative divisions of Croatia and a passing mention here since the two are really distinct governments. The comments about the powers of the government are very good - those need be specified thoroughly, with the government agencies (at least more significant ones, preferably all of them). I wouldn't like to go into detail on the government ministries since their titles are self-explanatory and all but two have their own wikilinked articles. I might rather add a section on governmental control/supervision of vast segment of economy through government owned companies and similar bodies. Naturally, the pending elections will cause names to change (as well as the Elections in Croatia article), but that's OK, much of everything else will remain as is, as far as this article is concerned.--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:06, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Looks very good with the most recent improvements! GregorB (talk) 15:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I tried to cover the remarks, which I found very constructive, hopefully adding some substance to the article without unnecessary clutter. The Banski dvori and MVPEI images should be relatively universal, and the PM image is naturally contingent on the current government.--Tomobe03 (talk) 17:37, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I would still like to change the formatting of the current government table as the background colours used really present readers with poor contrast. It would be better to have the colour coding in a separate, narrow column at the left or right end of each row, with a key at the bottom preferably. I'm not quite sure how to achieve that though (yet).--Tomobe03 (talk) 17:40, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Easily B class now, needless to say. I'm not too keen on the table's aesthetics/usability either, so a better solution would be welcome. Something like Government of Latvia? GregorB (talk) 18:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Two solid articles that might be used as models: Government of France (covers all three branches - way too much IMO) and Government of Singapore. With the possible exception of the latter, Government of Croatia appears to be the best national government article at the moment. GregorB (talk)

Yeah the Latvian cabinet table seems OK. As far as the French article is concerned, I guess you might argue that the judiciary and the legislature are parts of government, but given the fact that there are Judiciary of France and Parliament of France that seems like an overkill. The Singaporean example looks really good - and sure enough it is a GA.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:14, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Huh, the table is "fixed" now. It was actually so hard to read that I have only now noticed (while editing) that it contained several ministers specified twice, not to mentioned assigned to different ministries.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:50, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Interdependent (non-party) members of the Government

Predrag Matić and Orsat Miljenić are non-party members of the Government, and it's listed they belong to SDP. [1][2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.2.86.179 (talk • contribs) 21 January 2012

Good catch, thanks.--Tomobe03 (talk) 19:01, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Prime Minister capitalization?

Hi. The article is somewhat inconsistent regarding capitalization for "Prime Minister" or "prime minister". Currently, I'm thinking of going with singular being capitalized but plural ("eight prime ministers") not. Any thoughts? How does the English-language press normally handle it, and is "premier" capitalized in normal usage in Croatian? Thanks! Allens (talk) 16:41, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi! Croatian press regularly uses lowercase "premijer" both for Croatian and foreign PMs. As far as I can tell, English language media uses uppercase title when the title is accompanied by a name and lowercase title elsewhere as evidenced in this BBC article.--Tomobe03 (talk) 16:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll use the customary one for English language media; I agree with your analysis, and it's closer to the Croatian than my original thinking. There are some titles that get capitalized no matter whether there's a person's name behind them or not (for instance, "the President", at least when speaking of the US President), but I suspect this may be due to their being heads of state whereas the PM is the head of government. Thanks for the quick reply! Allens (talk) 17:28, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I'm happy to provide any assistance. I'll tackle maintenance tags (clarification/citation needed) as soon as possible but I'll wait a bit to avoid edit conflicts.--Tomobe03 (talk) 17:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Clarification of government offices/state bodies etc

• The Offices of the Croatian Government are supporting offices (service) of the cabinet and each is headed by a Head of the Office.
• The Central State Offices support the central government as a whole in terms of strategy coordination and infrastructure (e-Croatia) and each is headed by a State Secretary.
• The State Administration Bodies and the Public Sector Bodies are specialized bodies, the former being tasked with supervision of operation of other public services, including the Public Sector Bodies. The latter are, in that sense, tasked with execution of various tasks, and that is supervised by the State Administration Bodies. The distinction is made by the 22 Dec 2011 State Administration System Act. Why are the Central Bureau of Statistics and the Meteorological and Hydrological Service among the SABs is beyond me, but the government places them in that group. Each of these bodies is headed by a director.
• Office for Protocol is called that by the government and their task is declared to be performance of professional, organisational and technical protocol tasks for the government and the PM
• Co-signature of the speaker of the parliament does not actually represent an approval of PM's nomination of members of the government by Sabor - they still have to be approved by a majority vote in the parliament. This co-signature appears to make the nomination official and no more.--Tomobe03 (talk) 23:31, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I've tried to incorporate the above - I hope I've done the State Administration System Act reference properly... Allens (talk) 02:45, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

• The additions seem fine and I tweaked the citation a bit. I checked those four references tagged as dead and I ran checklinks once again - in short, all links were ok, so I removed the tags. Perhaps the websites were down at one point, but they seem to be working now.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Close to being done with copyedit

After a bit more clarification regarding the deputy prime ministers, I think my copyediting will be about done. I've been asked to look over some of the potential Featured Articles needing copyediting]]; after I do one or two of those (and finish helping with another article I've been peer reviewing), I'll take a look at the Croatian European Union membership referendum, 2012 article. Congrats, Tomobe03, BTW, on the GA for Parliament of Croatia! Good to work with you... Allens (talk) 21:12, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Once again, thanks for taking time and effort to copyedit this article. I really appreciate it and I honestly believe that quality of the article improves significantly through this type of cooperation. It is really great to have this much constructive feedback and I'm looking forward to the improving the referendum article. Thanks!--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:23, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

On a further note about the number of deputy prime ministers. Legislation ("Zakon o Vladi Republike Hrvatske [Government of the Republic of Croatia Act]") requires that at least one deputy prime minister is appointed, but it does not specify a maximum number - i.e. 1 deputy PM at the minimum and no upper limit on their number. The legislation also allows the deputy PMs to hold a ministerial position as well but it does not require that. The deputy PMs are assigned responsibility for a field normally encompassed by their ministry (if any) and several others in addition for the purposes of functioning of the inner cabinet but also, by extension, during cabinet meetings.--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I just realized what's missing: Neven Mimica is a deputy PM, but he is not a government minister unlike all other deputy PMs (including the 1st deputy PM) whose portfolios correspond to their respective ministries. Mr. Mimica's potfolio does not represent any single ministry and therefore overlaps with responsibilities of other ministers (interior and foreign relations).--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:55, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Got it. I've noted that the number of deputy PMs is simply currently four (and the number of those who are ministers three). Portfolio (government) currently redirects to Ministry (government department), so I've clarified that in this case "portfolio" means "area of responsibility". I understand fully about wanting feedback - I've listed one article myself under requests for copyediting for just that reason! There's also the Wikipedia:peer review process, incidentally, although to what degree that gets into also editing the article (as well as making suggestions) varies greatly depending on the peer reviewer (I sometimes do close to the same as I do for copyediting; others may do less). You are quite welcome; I'm likewise looking forward to working with you again. I believe I'll declare this officially finished, although I'll keep a watchlist eye on it still... Allens (talk) 23:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 15:09, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll review this article within 48 hours; been waiting for a review much too long. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 15:09, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Here are the issues I found with the lead:

• "is the main executive branch element of government in Croatia." element isn't really needed here.
• "established and a head (ban) " either head or ban can be used here, both seems a bit unwieldy.

• Both fixed as suggested.--Tomobe03 (talk) 19:23, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Will do the rest soon. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:14, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Here's the rest of my concerns:

• "said that a political party forms the Government." not convinced that the italics is needed there.

• Come to think of it, neither am I. Removed.--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:47, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

• "The Government manages the property of the Republic of Croatia unless" so no one owns any homes there? Just making sure I'm reading it right.

• Uh, that came of wrong. The government manages state property unless legislation provides otherwise. There is, of course, private property and the government has nothing to do with its management. I reworded this now and wikilinked state property, hopefully clarifying situation. Could you please have another look at this now?--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

• "whose portfolio (area of responsibility) overlaps" the definition should be used at first use of the word rather than the second.

• Moved as suggested.--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:56, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

• "acted as an administrative body governing Croatia within the Austrian Empire as a provisional government while the council existed (until 1850)." reword a bit to remove parenthesis. Also, does that mean it was only in existence three years? Noting that instead could help.

• Reworded to remove the parenthesis and to stress duration of establishment of the council.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:06, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

• "(of limited powers, excluding defence and foreign relations; the same was true of all preceding forms of government since the 19th century)." not sure the second part in the parentheses is needed.

• No it's not contributing to the section - and it is removed now.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:10, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll put the article on hold and will pass when the issues are fixed. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:57, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for taking time and effort to review the article.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:10, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Everything looks good now, so I'll pass the article as a GA. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:21, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Move from Croatian Government to Government of Croatia

I've described it as a "common version of the official name":[3] it's neither too formal (Government of the Republic of Croatia), nor it is colloquial or generically descriptive (Croatian Government). Also cf. Category:European governments, where "Government of Foobar" is the norm, and there is no particular reason to deviate from it in this instance. GregorB (talk) 14:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Government of Croatia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100318045625/http://www.vlada.hr/en/naslovnica/o_vladi_rh to http://www.vlada.hr/en/naslovnica/o_vladi_rh
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111123152513/http://www.vlada.hr/hr/naslovnica/o_vladi_rh/prethodne_vlade_rh to http://www.vlada.hr/hr/naslovnica/o_vladi_rh/prethodne_vlade_rh
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sabor.hr/Default.aspx?art=20091&sec=2462

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:17, 21 October 2017 (UTC)