Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:11, 2 September 2012

Serbia Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

General comment

• Smilja Avramov: A counsellor of Milosevic who among others (in reaction to the prosecution of Serb war criminals) declared that the Hague tribunal is illegal and Croatia is in many respects a pawn in a much larger Catholic expansionist plan...Croatian national leaders had no clear idea of national self- determination, unless it was founded on the genocide over Serbs
• Among others it's claimed that Shaban Polluzha was a member/leader of the unit, however, all other sources maintain the view that he was interned by the Italians in 1941, briefly joined BK in 1942, in 1943 became a Partisan commander and in 1944 fell out of favor as he refused to move his troops north to Syrmia after claiming that they were needed in the Drenica area to defend the population against Chetnik attacks i.e. according to Nenad Antonijevic the Yugoslavs accepted in their ranks as a partisan commander in 1943 someone who in 1941 was a collaborationist leader of a unit that indiscriminately massacred Serb civilians.
• If there's going to be an article about this fairly unknown unit, it should be written without any approach that tends towards nationalist victimization or revisionism and apologism.--— ZjarriRrethues —  18:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Slobodan Milošević, his trial and Croatia are irrelevant for this article.

The sources your presented here do not prove that Shaban Polluzha did not participate in September 1941 activities.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Given the disregard of WP:RS and the reverts (WP:BRD) I added some necessary tags.--— ZjarriRrethues —  01:27, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Your bold edits were reverted. Per BRD you should discuss, not tag bomb the article. Until you point to discussion at RSN with consensus that some sources used in this article are not RS don't tag it as such based on irrelevant arguments.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 06:10, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

For sure that authors like Smilja Avramov are heavily POV especially regarding ethnic conflicts in ex Yugoslavia and that affects the credibility and quality of this article. Per BRD your edits are the "bold" ones and wikipedia needs less than nationalist sources that fail RS so openly. Aigest (talk) 08:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Digging further ..."Avramov’s ‘expertise’ in the domain of international affairs appears to cover the secret machinations of an international anti-Serbian conspiracy at the hub of which are various world elite organisations such as the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group or Opus Dei. Throughout the 1990s, she was frequently interviewed on such topics by the Serbian press and the electronic media. Four of Avramov’s recent books – The post-heroic war of the international community against Yugoslavia (1995), The Trilateral (1998), Opus Dei (2000) and Civil society and NGOs (2006) - deal with the role of secret and semi-secret international organisations in the disintegration of Yugoslavia. In these works one finds numerous tropes typical of conspiracy theory: she alleges that the Russian revolution was masterminded and financed by ‘banking houses from Europe and the United States’, that Olaf Palme, JF Kennedy and Aldo Moro were all killed by the Trilateral Commission because they broke the vow of secrecy, and that the destruction of Yugoslavia was a joint endeavour of the Vatican and the US establishment..." link. Well that is too much for a credible source Aigest (talk) 09:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

• J.B: In your book you also mention the Elders of Zion...

• Avramov: Yes.
• J.B: ...and you mention that they are no longer...
• Avramov: ...no, they are active... I merely said when they were founded. I did not go into the Elders of Zion, but they are... I think that I mentioned it in a single sentence that they are still operating. In fact they are the most secret of all secret organisations, you know. At this point anyone who thinks that Avramov is RS should WP:STICK.--— ZjarriRrethues —  14:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Until you point to discussion at RSN with consensus that some sources used in this article are not RS don't tag it as such based on unrelated arguments.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:41, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

No need for RSN when dealing with Serbian authors that promote conspiracy theories (The Protocols of the Elders of Zion). That being said on the morrow I'll remove it and admin intervention will be asked if disruption is continued.--— ZjarriRrethues —  19:46, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes RSN is needed. Zion issue is not related.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:22, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

(unindent)You added even more unreliable sources and you still insist that somehow RSN is needed for the conspiracy theorists you use as sources i.e so I'll ask for admin intervention as I've always done in such cases.-— ZjarriRrethues —  08:16, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't agree with you that the sources I used are unreliable. Your arguments are not related to the topic of this article. Please don't repeat they are unreliable unless you can support your claims with consensus reached at RSN.

Don't forget to ask admin's intervention because you violated WP:BLP when you wrote comments about authors ("conspiracy theorists") of the sources you claim unreliable, "like you've always done in such cases".--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:33, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

What are you talking about Antidiskriminator? Discussing the reliability of the work of a living person on a talkpage, when that criticism is relevant to the article in question, ie Byford is a psychologist with published works regarding conspiracy theories, is completely justified. Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:15, 1 September 2012 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Peacemaker67 (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)

• Start-Class Serbia articles
• Low-importance Serbia articles
• WikiProject Serbia articles