Talk:Italia Brigade (Yugoslavia)

Military history: National / Balkan / European

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

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

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	Balkan military history task force (c. 500–present)
	European military history task force

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy 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.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Yugoslavia Low‑importance

	Italia Brigade (Yugoslavia) is within the scope of WikiProject Yugoslavia, a collaborative effort to improve the Wikipedia coverage of articles related to Yugoslavia and its nations. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.YugoslaviaWikipedia:WikiProject YugoslaviaTemplate:WikiProject YugoslaviaYugoslavia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Proposed move[edit]

I propose moving this article to Italia Brigade (Yugoslavia). O'Reilly mentions the brigade on page 97 etc, referencing Giacomo Scotti who lists 3,895 names of members of the brigade. This isn't even close to divisional strength, and O'Reilly doesn't mention that it became a division. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:07, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, there being no objection, I will make this move shortly. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:08, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wait opinion of user Passando, but this military unit was a division described in books by Italian scholars--Forza bruta (talk) 10:00, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please read MOS:ARTICLETITLE and WP:MILMOS#UNITNAME. Clearly the common name for this formation is the Brigade one, as it only fought as a brigade, and only became a division AFTER the war ended, AND only existed as a division for less than a month. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:37, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inadequately sourced synthesis that doesn't even relate to the article subject[edit]

@Passando: I don't speak Italian, but neither of two references mention either this brigade, its combatants, nor what they knew or didn't know of. Furthermore, their reliability is questionable - one is a blog post, the other is from the Government of Slovenia (predetermined to be biased), neither academic works that should be expected for serious content about WWII.

This sentence in its full form (before I removed that part) feels thrown in just to create WP:POVFORK of "facts" not supported by the main article of foibe massacres, it doesn't even belong to the "Composition" section of this article. I'm happy to hear back about this, I'll proceed with WP:BRD if I don't get an adequate counterargument. -Vipz (talk) 23:49, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You and that other account must learn to respect the contribution of users who translate and made new articles: now you have fallen here as a couple to make yet another editorial war with your non sense discussions.--Forza bruta (talk) 12:46, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]