Talk:Gospić massacre/Archive 1

Archive 1

Note to ChrisO

A very good, informative, NPOV article with good sources. Nice work. I personally wouldn't change anything except removing that "Persecution of Serbs" table, since it adds an unnecessarily inflammatory spin to the article. Besides, who can really equate persecution of Serbs in NDH and in Yugoslav wars? I won't change anything, consider it a suggestion. --Dr.Gonzo 17:30, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

M.B. statement

Milan Babic is a known lier and criminal. Would you put that in the article to discredit his personal admitting of all the atrocities committed against Croats in Krajina? --PaxEquilibrium 20:01, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Let as say fact in different way. He has been saying how he and his unit has killed 20 Serbs of Vukovar. Investigators of Louise Arbour has made finding that nothing of that is true. This is confirmed even by Belgrade professor Vojin Dabić. Now your statement is that he is not liar which is hard to trust when he speaks about new killing which are not confirmed by court or any other neutral source (police, Haag tribunal). Maybe I making mistake but in your thinking I do not see neutral position. We will make deal. I will not write that he is liar but that he has been speaking similar things before and that they are confirmed like lies ?? --Rjecina 20:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

If you or Paulcicero insist on his words I must put in article this words: "he is not trusted because of his similar false claims for Vukovar region " so that users can read neutral article. --Rjecina 21:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Rjecina i suggest you find some real sources, blogs aren´t really encyclopedia material. Paulcicero 11:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

They're explictly disallowed as not being reliable sources. It doesn't matter if they're in English or Croatian or Martian - if the source is bad it can't be cited. Since we're speaking of a living person, the strict rules on sourcing in WP:BLP also apply. -- ChrisO 12:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:UCK NLA.jpg

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) 11:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Gospić massacre/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

==December 2012== Assessment as a part of 2012 WP:CRO drive, performed on 27 December 2012: B1 - criterion not met: The article has significant shortcomings in terms of referencing. There are substantial parts of prose without any references. It is absolutely necessary that each paragraph covering major aspects of the topic contains at least one reference to a WP:RS, hence the criterion is not met. Even though {{cite web}} and similar appropriate referencing templates are not required I'd recommend applying the templates if GA or better quality is aimed at. At present the article employs a mix of the citation templates and bare-url references - which is not an obstacle for B-class in itself. B2 - criterion met. B3 - criterion met. B4 - criterion met. Not good enough for GA or better, but acceptable for B-class articles. B5 - criterion met. B6 - criterion not met. Just a little bit more contextual information is needed in the "Background" section to fix this though. Readers would benefit from information such as that the Croatian War of Independence was in progress, following Croatia's declaration of independence and proclamation of RSK with substantial Yugoslav Army involvement before jumping into details who held what territory. Likewise, it would be significant enough to point out that the barracks were under siege as a part of the Battle of the Barracks. Obviously, a lot of work went into the article, but further efforts are needed to make it comply with B-class criteria. Reassessing as C-class for now.

Last edited at 00:12, 27 December 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 14:52, 1 May 2016 (UTC)