Talk:Stari Most/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Comments

I translated from the French article, which turns out to be one of the most incomplete articles on this bridge. Please translate the Bosnian article if you know how. --66.61.53.131 06:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I noticed several spelling and punctuation errors, and while editing added a number of cross-references. In several cases, I deliberately selected the disambiguation pages for Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian. The text is unclear whether national armies or local partisans are involved in the particular action. Also, I attempted to describe the bridge towers more accurately -- as "left" and "right" originally used involve perspective -- hoping to determine the directions accurately from the many pictures here and on Mostar. WilliamAllenSimpson 02:59, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

There is no evidence that croatian forces destroyed the bridge. Please note that by recent analysis of recordings during destruction of Stari Most. An explosive initiated by detonating chord was used for destruction. Recordings and experimental fuse pictures could be seen at http://rapidshare.de/files/13852458/Old_bridge_desctruction_-_good_job.zip.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjosip (talk • contribs) 19:41, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Old bridge

I think there should be a picture of the broken bridge, and not only of the new and the old ones. The fact of having being broke is part of the sheer bridge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.239.103.44 (talk • contribs) 12:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

The first person to jump from the bridge

I don't see the point in mentioning that "The first person to jump from the bridge since it was re-opened was Enej Kelecija, a local who now resides in the United States."... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.239.103.44 (talk • contribs) 13:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--Stwalkerbot 16:21, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Destruction & reconstruction in introduction

Shouldn't the destruction and reconstruction be mentioned in the introduction? It is after all what brought it to the world's attention. 131.111.8.102 13:01, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

It is not clear what does the part of sentence: "destroyed the bridge to erase any sign of Ottoman architecture in Bosnia." stands for?

1.) Does it mean that the bridge itself is the one and the only "sign of Ottoman architecture in Bosnia" ? If so, then it's pointless to amphesize about destroying "any sign" because it is the only one also.

2.) Are you trying to point out that Croats tried to destroy wherever it could any _signs_ of Otoman architecture on the teritory it controlled or could reach to ?

If so, it is not correct. There is a bridge in village Klepci deep inside teritorry controlled by Croats built by Ottomans and it is intact: http://www.rb-donjahercegovina.ba/GalerijaDetaljno.aspx?id=263

What exactly is the meaning of this sentence, I can't see anything else but political propaganda ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.250.98.243 (talk) 13:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Old Bridge, lies and videotapes

This is a very funny article, or at least the part about the destruction of the Old Bridge.

"The Old Bridge stood for 427 years, until the bridge was destroyed by Bosnian Croat artillery fire on November 9, 1993 during the Bosnian War.[1]"

You are basing this sentence on a Guardian article, in which the author insults Croats by calling them rednecks. Should that be a source of an encyclopedic article?

http://www.vecernji.hr/vijesti/nije-dokazano-da-je-hvo-srusio-stari-most-mostaru-clanak-79259

You can see in this link (if you can read Croatian) that Jean-Claude Antonetti said that it wasn't proven that HVO destroyed the bridge. And as it is not proven that HVO destroyed the bridge it should be removed from the article. Just leave it until the trial is finished. Because this article is implying that the Croats destroyed the bridge, without any solid evidence or sentence. I will remove the statement that the Croats destroyed the Old Bridge until the trial is finished (this year). Mimar Hajrudin (talk) 22:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I have added another source supporting the claim that the HVO destroyed the bridge, but have added a further reference to a book that claims the HVO were not involved. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry but that's not enough, those sources you have added cannot be opened. And, as I can see, they just passingly mention that HVO destroyed the bridge. Something that the authors probably saw on Wikipedia, and didn't explore that statement.

I think the whole part which says that HVO destroyed the Old Bridge should be removed, because it is, until the end of trial, nothing more than a speculation. A speculation which is mucking Croats, by stating, without any proof, that they destroyed the bridge. The verdict will be brought soon, probably this year. And I have put a link to an article (although in Croatian) which quotes judge Jean-Claude Antonetti, from last weeks proceeding, that it is not proven that HVO destroyed the bridge.

P.S. Sorry, for this little revert war, I hope we will discuss this as civilized people. Mimar Hajrudin (talk) 23:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

The sources are journal articles, which, per WP:SOURCES, are usually the most reliable. The fact that you don't have access to them isn't a barrier to verifiability, per WP:SOURCEACCESS. Regarding the edit conflict, please take a look at WP:BRD and note that we are currently in the "discuss" phase, so I would advise you not to make any more reverts for the moment. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I have a proposition for you. I suggest that we remove the sentence "Slobodan Praljak, the commander of the Croatian Defence Council, is currently on trial at the ICTY with the prosecution alleging that he ordered the destruction of the bridge, among other charges.[2][3]" from the introduction, and leave this to the "Destruction" part.

I have to correct you, three experts aren't Croats, they just work in Croatia. One of them is a Muslim (or a Bosniak, I don't know how he declares), the other is a Serb, and the third one is a Croat.

So I suggest the following in the "Destruction" part: "The Old Bridge stood for 427 years, until it was destroyed on 9 November 1993 during the Bosnian War. Responsibility for the destruction of the bridge is attributed to Bosnian Croat artillery fire,[1][4][5] although a book written by three experts from Zagreb, out of which one testified at the trial, claims that the Croatian Defence Council were not responsible for the destruction of the bridge but that it was instead destroyed by a mine activated from Bosniak territory.[6] Another expert from Germany has a same opinion. Slobodan Praljak, the commander of the Croatian Defence Council, is currently on trial at the ICTY for ordering the destruction of the bridge, among other charges.[2][3]"

What do you think? Mimar Hajrudin (talk) 21:08, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to change the description of the experts, although you will need a reference for the statement about one of them testifying at the trial, and for the German expert statement. I'm not sure about removing the material on Praljak from the introduction because it's an important part of the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I have put the source about the German expert, but I can't find a link for the video about the testimony. It's on www.slobodanpraljak.com page, but I can't get the link. I don't know Larry, I feel like that sentence in the introduction is directing the reader into thinking the Croats destroyed the bridge. I think it should be only in the destruction part where we have arguments from both sides. Mimar Hajrudin (talk) 22:36, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Movie about the rebuilding

I know that there are several documentaries about the rebuilding of the bridge, but I am looking specifically for the one that plays inside the "Old Bridge Museum", inside the section C ("Labyrinth"). I went there some days ago and saw this movie, but the DVD that is sold nearby contains only about 7 minutes of badly edited footage. Does anyone know if the documentary inside the museum is available somehow, or at least how it is called? Thank you very much! 140.105.238.148 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC).

Opening line

"is a 16th century" seems odd use of present tense. There's been a bridge there since then, but the current bridge is, according to our text, not a 16th century bridge, but a modern reconstruction. --Dweller (talk) 19:55, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done - Denimadept (talk) 03:35, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

8 of November or 9 of November?

I am watching a documentary from BBC called "Death of Yugoslavia" and there is a recording of the bridge being destroyed (about 1:47). In this recording it shows the date as 8 of November, not 9 of November. Perhaps the camera had the wrong date? --Pinnecco (talk) 19:32, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

@Pinnecco: 9 of November, at 10:16 CET. The bridge was heavily damaged in previous days, but it held on somehow until the mentioned date and time. Greetings from Mostar. − KWiki (talk) 22:51, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Stari Most. 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) 13:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Stari most

When was the war 46.248.79.159 (talk) 12:42, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

From 1993 to 1994, if you're referring to the Croat-Muslim War. Governor Sheng (talk) 15:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Not the widest human-made arch in the world

One example of a wider arch is the Pont du Diable (Céret), and on that page there are 8 more links to bigger arches. Janjko (talk) 13:30, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stari_Most/Archive_1&oldid=1205832256"