Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Bijeljina massacre

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history‎ | Assessment
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:44, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bijeljina massacre edit

Nominator(s): ◅ PRODUCER (TALK)


I am nominating this article for A-Class review because it has passed GA class review, it has been expanded since then, and I believe it meets the necessary A-Class criteria. ◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 17:11, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments: G'day, I only took a quick look, but might come back a bit later after hopefully someone with more topic knowledge has taken a look:

  • there seems to be a mixture of US and British English, for instance "honor" (US) and "Defence" (British). This should be made consistent;
  • "In 2010, Serbia’s prosecutors office": a couple of options --> "prosecutor's" or "prosecutors'" depending on if there is more than one etc. (in the lead you have "Serbian War Crime Prosecutor's Office", so I would probably change to that as it seems to be a proper noun;
  • "Gallivan, Rory (30 January 2009). "Witness Says Bosniaks Killed Before War Began". Institute for War & Peace Reporting": this is currently in the References, but doesn't appear to have been used as a citation
  • in the News articles section, "New York Times" for the Kifner source probably should be in italics for consistency of style. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • G'day, I made an attempt to copy edit the first section of the article. Can you please take a look at my changes and check that I haven't changed your meaning too much? If you are happy with them, please let me know and I will have a go at the rest of the article tomorrow. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:38, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Looks good. Please carry on. --◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 11:29, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Okay, I've finished my copy editing (thanks for your patience). Please check my changes and adjust as you see fit. (I think I got most issues, but prior to taking this to FAC – if that is your plan – I recommend getting someone at the Guild of Copy Editors to take a look in case I missed anything). The only other suggestion I have is for the titles of the non-English sources to be translated. For example, the Musli and Pazarac newspaper articles. This can be done by using the "|trans title=" parameter in the cite news/web templates, I think. I have added my support on prose (although I can't really comment on content). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:31, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've reviewed it and it looks good. I added the translated titles as suggested. Thanks for your help. --◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 15:27, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "In September 1991, Bijeljina had been claimed by the Bosnian Serbs to be a part of a "Serbian Autonomous Region" later, in March 1992": Something's missing.
    • Modified sentence and moved comma. Not sure if that's what you meant.
  • "which was motivated by the creation of a Greater Serbia.": Be careful with "which"; what does it refer to here?
    • Changed to "both of which were".
  • "and "killings, rapes, house searches, and looting"": Per MOS, quotes need to be attributed in the text.
    • Reworded
  • "followed afterwards": followed
    • Done
  • "in anticipation of a Bosnian government delegation who was set to arrive and tasked with investigating ": in anticipation of the arrival of a Bosnian government delegation tasked with investigating
    • Done
  • "in the hundreds or at a thousand": in the hundreds or even a thousand
    • Done
  • "A number of sources put the figure of civilians killed in the hundreds or at a thousand while the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) determined that it was at least 48.": "Some say 1000, some say 48" doesn't work; some clue is needed how the figures could be so far apart. One thing that would work, if accurate: "A number of sources put the figure of civilians killed in the hundreds or even a thousand, but the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was only able to verify 48 deaths." Readers will understand that you might come up with completely different numbers depending on what kind of evidence you relied on.
    • Done
  • "To date local courts have not prosecuted anyone while the Serbian War Crimes Prosecutor’s Office has arrested an individual of the SDG": See WP:DATED. "As of October 2013, local courts had not prosecuted anyone for the deaths, but a member of the SDG was under arrest at the Serbian War Crimes Prosecutor’s Office"
    • Done
  • "Republika Srpska": Why in Serbian?
    • Sources and English Wiki use "Republika Srpska".
  • "The first of April is celebrated as the "liberation day of Bijeljina" and a street ...": Not everyone celebrates that day, so: "[Whoever] celebrate 1 April as the "liberation day of Bijeljina", and a street there ..." [assuming it's in Bijeljina]
    • Clarified it's celebrated by local Serbs.
  • I got to the end of the lead. There's more to fix here than I'm going to have time for, sorry. - Dank (push to talk) 02:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • G'day, Dan, not sure if you are free, but if you are, would you mind checking some of my changes just to make sure I haven't missed anything? Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:31, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sure. I looked at just your edits. That all looks good, except that "of whom 59% were Bosnian Serbs, 31% were Bosniaks, and the rest belonged to other ethnicities" is nonparallel because it expands to: of whom 59% were Bosnian Serbs, of whom 31% were Bosniaks, and of whom the rest belonged to other ethnicities. - Dank (push to talk) 04:06, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks, Dan. I had another go, but I'm not sure if that is an improvement. Sorry, my brain doesn't appear to be working today: [1] Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:05, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • CommentsSupport
    • One dab link [2]:
      • Mine
    • External links check reveals a couple of dead links [3]:
      • Sjećanje na početak aprila 1992. godine: Bijeljina slavi zločine (info) [avaz.ba]
      • Bijeljina's Strange Silence Over War Crimes (info) [www.bim.ba]
        • Added mirror for second dead link. Could not find a reliable one for the first.
    • Images lack Alt Text so you might consider adding it [4] (suggestion only - not an ACR req).
    • The Citation Check Tool reveals no issues with reference consolidation (no action req'd).
    • Images either PD or have an appropriate FUR, captions look ok (no action req'd).
    • The Earwig Tool reveal no issues with copyright violation or close paraphrasing [5] (no action req'd).
    • One duplicate links per WP:REPEATLINK:
      • Slobodan Milošević
        • Removed
    • "Over the course of 1990 a group of Serb JNA officers and experts from the JNA's Psychological Operations Department had developed the RAM Plan[8] with the intent of organizing expatriate Serbs, consolidating control of the SDS...", abbrev "SDS" needs to be introduced here.
      • Fixed
    • Where you have multiple citations they should be arranged chronologically - for instance "Some sources put the figure in the hundreds or at a thousand.[33][28][22][34]" - this should be "Some sources put the figure in the hundreds or at a thousand.[22][28][33][34]"
      • Fixed
    • Missing word here: "On the same day, Bosnian Defense Minister Ejup Ganić and Croat members of the coalition government urged Izetbegović to mobilize the TORBiH due to the inability of JNA to stop the violence." Should be "On the same day, Bosnian Defense Minister Ejup Ganić and Croat members of the coalition government urged Izetbegović to mobilize the TORBiH due to the inability of the JNA to stop the violence."
      • Fixed
    • "Mirko Blagojević, who is claimed to have led a group called Mirko's Chetniks..." Mirko's Chetniks have already been introduced earlier in the prose so the phrase "a group called" seems redundant. Consider instead: "Mirko Blagojević, who is claimed to have led Mirko's Chetniks..." Anotherclown (talk) 08:04, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. Support.

  • Bijeljina had been claimed by the Bosnian Serbs—can we use active instead of passive voice?
    • Changed.
  • Is there a concise definition of Bosniak that could be added in parentheses?
    • Added.
  • on 31 March it was provoked into an armed conflict—again with the passive voice
  • were motivated by the creation of a Greater Serbia—perhaps it's just me, but that seems an odd sentence structure; when one is striving for something (or aiming to create something, as in this case), I wouldn't normally say one is motivated by it. Motivation is more to do with emotion than political ambition. Perhaps Dan might want to add his five cents?
    • Thanks for catching this, I misunderstood. - Dank (push to talk) 00:59, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Changed.
  • Bijeljina was overtaken by the SDG—passive voice
    • Changed.
  • with little resistance and murders, rapes, house searches, and pillaging followed reads a little odd. Perhaps replace the "and" with a semicolon or at least give it a comma.
    • Replaced.
  • On 3 April, the bodies of those massacred were removed in anticipation of the arrival of a Bosnian government delegation...—do we need the "of those massacred"? And you're using the passive voice again—removed by whom?
    • Changed.
  • less than 2,700 people of the 30,000-strong—is "fewer" more appropriate than "less" here?
    • Changed.
  • Tensions in Bijeljina had been high prior to its takeover by Serb paramilitary groups and the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA). What takeover is that? This is the background section, so the takeover has not been previously introduced, and you shouldn't assume prior knowledge on the part of the reader.
    • Removed.
  • reportedly spent a month in Bijeljina—reported by whim? Do we have a reason to doubt this?
    • Removed.
  • ... to "keep the peace". Would it be preferable to add "ostensibly" an remove the scare quotes?
    • Added.
  • Can we have a parenthetical note to define "Panthers", especially as it's a red link? Without hovering over the link, it sounds like a sports team!
    • Clarified.
  • On 3 April, the dead were collected and removed from Bijeljina... Same problem as the similar sentence in the lead
    • Changed.
  • They were sent by Izetbegović—more passive voice, though this use of it might be more acceptbale
  • ...during which a Serb journalist who had bypassed the checkpoints confronted the group and warned Arkan: "You'll never be forgiven for what you have done to the Muslims in Bijeljina. History will judge you". What does this quote add to the article?
    • Removed, figured it was notable since the ICTY included it in its judgement.
  • Is Vojkan Đurković notable?
    • Unlinked
  • How confident are you in your sourcing for the bulleted list in the "War crimes prosecution" section? You need rock-solid sources to effectively label several (probably) living people as war criminals. The sources as they are look a little shaky to me.
    • All of them are mentioned by the International Crisis Group's report which "names individuals in eighteen Republika Srpska municipalities and the Brcko District who are alleged to have committed indictable acts or supervised those who did so, and are therefore potentially indictable for war crimes under the criteria established by the ICTY."

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:42, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging PRODUCER. There's no rush—just checking you've seen this. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:49, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi HJ Mitchell thanks for the review. Please see my changes here [6] and tell me what you think. --◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 14:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, please excuse my tardiness in replying—I've had some health issues. I'm happy with the changes you've made. I don't know enough to rebut your argument on the sourcing, but if you progress to FAC, be aware that somebody might bring it up. I'm certainly happy this is A-class material, and if you're heading to FAC, I shouldn't think you'll have too many problems. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:08, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Bijeljina_massacre&oldid=1079294267"