Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Ba Congress

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 by Sturmvogel 66 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 17:20, 25 January 2020 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Ba Congress

[edit]

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (talk)

Ba Congress (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

This article is about the final roll of the dice for Draža Mihailović's Chetnik guerilla movement in occupied Yugoslavia during WWII. Conducted at a point when large parts of the Chetnik movement had been drawn into collaboration with the Germans and their puppets, it may have been conducted with the tacit approval of the Germans. Its main outcome was the creation of a single political party and political platform for the Chetniks, something that came far too late in proceedings to have any impact on the eventual Allied decision to abandon the Chetniks and throw their full weight behind Josip Broz Tito's Partisans. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:26, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting I'll be largely incommunicado 8-17 December, but will address any comments as soon as I get back from holidays. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:38, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Source review—pass

[edit]
  • English language sources look good. I can't confidently evaluate the reliability of the non-English sources, as I don't understand Serbo-Croatian, so will AGF on that. A search on Google Scholar in English didn't turn up anything new. No source checks done because author has a history of successful nominations. buidhe 16:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Buidhe! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:30, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Harrias

[edit]
  • "..forces of the puppet Government of National Salvation.." Explain, either with a wikilink or a footnote, what is meant by "puppet" here.
  • "In April 1941, Kingdom of Yugoslavia.." Should it not be the Kingdom of Yugoslavia?
  • "..its Axis neighbors, Hungary, Bulgaria and Italy." To clarify that "its Axis neighbors" is a descriptor of the subsequent list, I would change the comma after "neighbors" to a colon.
  • "Before the defeat, King Peter.." In the lead, he is referred to as "King Peter II": be consistent.
  • "..Yugoslav government-in-exile in London in June." This becomes a bit of a tongue twister with the quick repetition of "in": "government-in-exile in London in June." I would suggest finding a way to reword it to avoid this.
  • "Two resistance movements soon emerged in occupied Yugoslavia, the almost exclusively ethnic Serb and monarchist Chetniks, led by Draža Mihailović, and the multi-ethnic and communist-led Partisans, under Josip Broz Tito." Again, a colon to indicate the start of the list (and in this case, a semi-colon to split it) would provide more clarity: "Two resistance movements soon emerged in occupied Yugoslavia: the almost exclusively ethnic Serb and monarchist Chetniks, led by Draža Mihailović; and the multi-ethnic and communist-led Partisans, under Josip Broz Tito."
  • "It is possible that Mihailović believed that he did not need to do so.." According to who? This opinion needs inline attribution.
  • "Over a period of time.." Unless a specified time frame is given, this is unnecessary. Everything happens over a period of time, be that nanoseconds or millennia.
  • "On 29 October 1943, Adolf Hitler had authorised.." "had" seems superfluous.
  • "..was concerned about the support he was receiving shifting to them." I had to re-read this a couple of times to make sense of it. Once I worked it out, it was fine, but I wonder if it could be re-worded for clarity. (Or, it might just be me.)
  • "In order to widen the base of the Chetnik movement, Mihailović contacted representatives of the pre-war political parties living in Belgrade, assuring them that the former illiberal approach of the movement, as advocated by his close political advisers, the former republican and Black Hand adherent Dragiša Vasić and the Chetnik ideologue Stevan Moljević, had been replaced with a commitment to democracy." This sentence feels like it is doing too much; can it be simplified?
  • "The politician that appears to have taken the lead.." By phrasing it as "that appears to" makes it sound like OR unless there is inline attribution.

Reviewed to end of Prelude. More to follow. Harrias talk 16:17, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Harrias, sorry it has taken me so long to get back to this, I had a bit of a Wikibreak over the December/January holidays. I think I've addressed all your points so far. Here are my edits. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:23, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Harrias, just checking you had seen this? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:55, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I only spotted it on Friday, and we went away over the weekend. I should be able to take a look over the rest tomorrow. Harrias talk 21:01, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "..together with two or three Croats, one Slovene and one Bosnian Muslim." Then a few sentences later: "Also in attendance were Pribićević, a few Croats, one Slovene, and one Bosnian Muslim."
  • "Mihailović was also opposed to Vasić have a significant role in the congress.." Presumably this should be "having" not "have".
  • "..with Mihailović retaining all.." Avoid Noun plus -ing.
  • Wikilink "unicameral parliament" to unicameralism, and "constitutional monarchy" to constitutional monarchy.
  • "The congress also resolved that Yugoslavia should be a constitutional monarchy headed by a Serb sovereign.[40] The congress also resolved that.." Repetition of "The congress also resolved that.."
  • "..SS-Gruppenführer and Generalleutnant der Polizei.." These foreign phrases need to use {{lang}} instead of just plain italics.
  • "This effort was still-born.." Can we use less evocative terminology.
  • "emigre diaspora" What does this mean; are there simpler words that can be used, or wikilinks that can be provided?

All done. Nothing major. Harrias talk 13:11, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All done I reckon, Harrias. These are my edits. Thanks very much for your review! Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:10, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
One MOS point remaining, but given that the article "does not require substantial copy-editing to be fully MoS-compliant" I am happy to support this as meeting the A-class requirements. Harrias talk 07:18, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:59, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by CPA-5

[edit]
  • was drawn into World War II when Germany and its allies Maybe pipe Germany to Nazi Germany?
  • Some Yugoslav territory was annexed by its Axis neighbors, Hungary, Bulgaria and Italy Hold on a second is this written in American English or is it acceptable to use neighbors instead of neighbours in Australian English?
  • Italian capitulation in September 1943, with the Germans directly Unlink Germans here.
  • I see some words using -ize and -ise.
  • who were to consult with the various leaders.[46][30] Re-order the refs.
  • collaborators in the occupied territory.[32][14][50] Same as above.
All done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • incapable of protecting the interests of Yugoslavia and the king --> "incapable of protecting the interests of Yugoslavia and the King"
I don't think that is per MOS because it is not juxtaposed with his name. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • territory of Serbia from the neighboring occupied territories of Same as above.
  • gave them an opportunity to convoke the Ba Congress --> "allowed them to convoke the Ba Congress"?
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Chetnik old guard were originally opposed to the involvement --> "The Chetnik old guard was originally opposed to the involvement"?
In this context, we are talking about a group of individuals making up the old guard, so using the past plural is correct. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • particularly the Churchill government and British public --> "particularly the Churchill government and the British public"
Not necessary. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • calling its members communist sympathisers and Croat separatists --> "calling its members' communist sympathisers and Croat separatists"
I don't think this is right. A terminal apostrophe on a plural noun denotes possession, not the case here. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • his removal from his position as minister in the government --> "his removal from his position as a minister in the government"
OK, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's anything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 15:02, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All addressed CPA-5. Happy to discuss where I haven't agreed on the grammar. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
G'day CPA-5 just checking you'd seen this? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:55, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Everything about this one is good to go other than your support, CPA-5. Is there anything else that needs addressing? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:00, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review - pass

[edit]
  • "File:Dragoljub Draža Mihailović.jpg": the source does not lead (directly) to the image.
  • Caption "Map showing the occupation and partition of Yugoslavia, 1941–43." I suspect that you mean 'occupation zones'. And shouldn't it be '1941–1943'?
  • "File:Draža confers with his men.jpg" Again source issues. Any chance of linking a little more directly to the image?
  • "File:Drugo zasedanje AVNOJ-A v Jajcu.jpg" The source link "S3SWK8OI" seems to be dead.
  • "File:George Musulin.jpg" The source is 404ed.
  • "File:Serbia moljevic1941 en.png" "Own work" doesn't cut it as a source. It needs to be based on a RS.

Gog the Mild (talk) 13:14, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gog, I think I've addressed these. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:37, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Gog, just added a Crown copyright expired image of General Wilson to replace the one of Musulin I deleted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:42, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Peacemaker67: That all looks good to me. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:17, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from AustralianRupert

[edit]

Support: G'day, I'm sorry this has been sitting here for some time -- unfortunately I haven't had much time or energy to do much reviewing recently. Sorry. Anyway, I have a few suggestions/observations: AustralianRupert (talk) 09:01, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • pp. preface. --> suggest using the loc= parameter
  • in the References, Trbovich, Ana S. (5 February 2008) --> is it necessary to be so precise with the date? We usually just present that year, I believe
  • citation # 29 seems to be presented differently to the others
  • translation for citation 51?
  • in the References, "Oxford, UK" v. "Abingdon-on-Thames, United Kingdom"
  • in the References, is there a translation for the title of the Latas work?
  • in the References, endash for the title of the Karchmar work?
  • same as above for the Ford and Latas works
  • Despite the fact that some amongst Mihailovic's followers were against agreeing to the politicians' demands, the Chetnik leader accepted them, with the proviso that the politicians make a firm commitment to such an agreement. This is potentially a bit complex. I wonder if this might work better: "Some of Mihailovic's followers were against agreeing to the politicians' demands. Nevertheless, the Chetnik leader accepted them, with the proviso that the politicians firmly commit to the agreement."
  • removing the legitimacy he had enjoyed --> "removing his legitimacy"?
  • in the lead, it has been argued that the congress --> I wonder if it should be attributed who argues this?
  • in the lead, opposition to the Germans and all its allies --> does "its" refer to the Germans here? If so, maybe "all of their allies"?
  • message was a test formulated by the British to test Mihailovic's --> suggest changing one mention of "test" here, to vary the language
  • there are no dup links or dab links (no action required)
  • suggest adding alt text: [1]
  • ext links all work (no action required)
  • than the AVNOJ concept. " --> remove the space between the full stop and the quote mark
  • OCLC or similar for the Tasic source?
  • citation density looks good to me, but I cannot comment on sources or content, I'm sorry, but will take it on GF that they are adequate
Thanks for taking a look at this, AR. A bit more political than my usual fare. I think I've captured all these, Here are my edits. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:57, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, added my support now. Thanks for your efforts. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:48, 23 January 2020 (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/Ba_Congress&oldid=937590652"