Talk:Banja Luka incident

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aircraft ID[edit]

Please, go to the discussion page about the Super Galeb. There is documented evidence confirming that the Serb aircraft involved in this incident were actually J-21 Jastreb. DagosNavy 00:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:UCK NLA.jpg[edit]

Image:UCK NLA.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 11:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting[edit]

The page's formatting is all messed up. Please fix it. Isopropyl (talk) 19:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

npov[edit]

This page gives a very one-sided view on this military confrontation: It is fully written from the American perspective, The tone is also less fro neutral (vectored, bingo fuel, the brand names of the missiles (which were the brands of the bombs dropped by the Serbs?), pilot nicknames).

Also, the title "Banja Luka incident" is npov; Banja luka is a city with 350.000 people where a lot of things happen. That in 1994 there was a air battle approx 60km southwest of the town, which happened to involve some americans, doesnt justify to call it Banja Luka incident. 9/11 isnt called the new york incident, and that in fact happened in the center of town. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Extrastart1 (talk • contribs) 07:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, do you have a better name to call this incident? – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 00:11, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved, propose separately if a new title is warranted Mike Cline (talk) 23:55, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


– As mentioned above, the titles of these two articles, although they sound catchy, are not luckily chosen, and seem to represent a USAF-bias ("how to pronounce Mrkonjic"). I'd be happy with any other title which does not brink on a WP:POVTITLE. As a side note, a few articles on shot down local planes would be welcome to balance things out... Relisted. BDD (talk) 17:18, 29 October 2012 (UTC) Stratoprutser (talk) 14:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support ...the term Banja Luka incident in GBooks refers to something which happened on the ground. See Lloyd J. Matthews The Future of the American Military Presence in Europe - Page 28 - 2000 "The Banja Luka incident demonstrated that if peacekeeping forces have mobility, information superiority, interoperability, and sublethal means of engagement, they can win in situations where nobody even knows there's been a fight." In ictu oculi (talk) 13:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As for the second, I see en.wp's neologism "Created page with 'The Mrkonjić Grad incident, June 2, 1995, was an incident in which a Bosnian Serb Army SA-6 surface-to-air missile shot down a USAF F-16 near .." was picked up by a book in 2009. It is still evidently a wikipedia-created term with no reliable source. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:02, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose; both proposed names comprehensively fail WP:COMMONNAME and are deeply implausible search terms. Won't somebody think of the readers? I could be open to some other new name which is actually used by sources. bobrayner (talk) 11:03, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, any other name will do, what would the readers like? In fact the Mrkonjic Grad one is more about the downing and the following rescue attempts, and the Banja Luka one is about a serious beach of the no fly zone. So there should be titles possible? Inspiration here-- Stratoprutser (talk) 12:36, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Relisting comment I have to agree with bobrayner—the proposed titles are quite unwieldy. What do reliable sources call these incidents? --BDD (talk) 17:18, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can see, they don't. There is no "name". At least Banja Luka airfight, Mrkonjić Grad airfight would be better than "incident" per WP:PRECISION. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:45, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That does seem like an improvement. It's very difficult to imagine someone searching for the proposed names above. --BDD (talk) 17:05, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Close these two incidents should be proposed separately, since the target naming could each separately use discussion -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 06:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment on date format: there should not be a comma between "28 February" and "1994", that's no valid wiki date format. Also, should the format not be consistent between these articles? HandsomeFella (talk) 16:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have suggested a merge of one of these articles at Talk:Scott O'Grady#Merge. DrKiernan (talk) 19:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Banja Luka incident. 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:

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) 15:21, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Banja_Luka_incident&oldid=1205699215"