Talk:Željko Ražnatović

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information:

	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: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

[edit] POV

This article offers no sources for its claims. Some of them are obvious anti-Arkan lies (e.g. convicted murderer). The rest consists of hardly checkable allegations and rumours( e.g. father beat him, met criminals abroad etc.). Though his role as a national hero is mentioned it remains totally unclear how a person characterized in that way can become a hero. None of the war crime allegations had been proofed in a trial. Allegations of war crimes and even investigations against other politicians exist (e.g. Sharon). But it is not the task of Wikipedia to comment, improve or substitutes court procedures.

You have to be nuts to believe that Arkan did not commit such atrocities. First, I can cite the US Defense Department, US Department of State, and Richard Holbrooke. A few years ago there was a special History Channel documentary covering Arkan, providing pictures and video of Arkan and his forces comitting the listed atrocities.

I have seen the History Channel "documentary". Unlike many people who are editing this page I've lived in Serbia during the 90s and I've even had the chance to meet Arkan and years later his widow. Now the History Channel should be ashamed of how bad, and unacurate their documentary was or how misinformed the so called experts who got to talk were. I've seen it a few times and I was I was to start making the list of the lies they said I'd just get bored.--212.200.204.254 17:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bizarre claims

"In fact Arkan was convicted on death by West. NATO commandos planned to kidnap Arkan with apache helicopter. After capture he would be tranferred to The Hague where under torture he would confessed his crimes. Then they would hang him in jail, which would be explained to public as his suicide because of hopeless situation in which he founded himself. However they gived up because of appraisal that such operation would have very high risk factor."

... where does this information come from? Given that these are highly controversial allegations, sources ought to be produced to back them up. As it is this paragraph sounds like slightly ridiculous properganda (by 83.146.48.113, 2004-07-11 15:50:55)

Also, the use of English at this point in the article, seems to have deteriorated.

I conclude that a secondary author has addedd dubious information to an article begun by a primary, and more reliable, author. (by 218.101.15.155 2004-09-10 07:34:20)

The second part of the article has no objectivity whatsoever. It is simply the worst wikipedia biography I read about such a controversial figure. The article simply treats Arkan as a hero, as the most admirable Serb ever lived. Every sentence is soaked with a fanatic admiration for Arkan, the way he killed his prisoners, the way he slept with so many women. The personal quotes section is full of idiotic remarks that would appeal to a 5 year old. Seriously, this article is a joke, and should be removed.

[edit] n or nj

I'm not sure why English texts so often transliterate his name into Raznatovic when it's supposed to be Raznjatovic (some other diacritics notwithstanding). The Serbian letter њ is different from н and it's differently pronounced. --Joy [shallot] 22:27, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure, whether they are correct but in Serbian there are far more and more credible sources which mention his name as Ražnatović. Nikola 16:45, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I suppose we'd have to see the birth or the death certificate to be sure... --Joy [shallot] 20:41, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It is definately Ražnatović. After reading hundreds of articles and several books about Arkan, and even having a chance to see him in real life back in the '90s I guarantee it is n, not nj. --213.244.195.24 00:52, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Objectivity

I'm not trying to be rude here, but am i the only one that thinks the 2nd half of the article has a certain pro-Arkan bias? (by Timon 2004-09-10 10:23:14)

This article presents myth as a fact, the following example is highly dubious. It is more likely that arkan was freed as his father was a general in JNA "Arkan was unnoficialy employed as an undercover agent from 1973, assassinating political emigrants and opponents of the ruling Communist regime." (by 24.85.62.165 2005-03-21 05:49:42)

I Agree, this article is a shame of wikipedia and Serbian people, what disgousts me most is the fact that Ivo Andrić article is 3 thimes shorter then arkan article.

I did some cleanup, removing the most egregious theories. It's difficult to separate the truth, myths, and conspiracy theories, especially when the article is so unsourced, and I'm really not passionate about the subject to do the research.

I wasn't sure what to do with all those quotes, so I removed them entirely. A few could be preserved to illustrate his state of mind, but I didn't feel like doing the selection; we have wikiquote for that anyway. They're still in the edit history, so if anyone feels like it... Duja 09:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] English Please?

I was browsing this page casually and came to the same conclusion as another before me: the English is bad. Could whoever wrote this, initially or in contribution, please review it? -JH. 13, Jan 2005 (by 61.204.250.3)

[edit] Chronology

The Chronology of this article is very confusing. He leaves to Europe in 1972 aged 20 and gets into all sorts of mischief, then in 1983 he shoots two federal policemen, then in 1973 he is employed as an undercover agent, and then in 1981 he returns to Yugoslavia again. (by 217.204.171.199 2005-06-09 17:11:30)

whoever wrote dis articl dusnt noe how 2 spel

[edit] Photo credit

That photo "Arkan and his Tigers" is copyrighted by Ron Haviv (see Blood and Honey website). I'm barely competent at Wiki (and I don't have much time) or I'd try dealing with it. I think a link to Haviv's photoessay would be a good thing, but using his photo? Not. - An Academic (by 69.177.32.147 2005-07-19 13:32:45)

I think it should be alright to use it.

[edit] A Badly Written Article

Željko Ražnatović was never indicted for his alleged criminal life so I don't think an encyclopedia is a place where he can be named "war profiteer, mafia supreme boss, black market businessman..." To me it's almost as if someone took a dictionary and looked for the English translation of all the bad adjectives/words they could remember.

 Of course he was not going to be indicted by the govrnment he worked
 for. Officialy he does not have a criminal record between 1992-2000,
 but one can not say that he was not a 'war profiteer'. It does not
 have to be documented in any way to be named such, but his increased
 financial wealth after the Bosnian war, did contribute to this.

OK, so he wasn't indicted by the government he worked for (although as I've mentioned he was only and only to some extent responsible to the National Security Agency), but he was never convicted in the Hague so what happened with "innocent until proven guilty". It's not "innocent until caught." He was never convicted and that's a fact. Now we can say that he was elegedly a war profiteer but that's it.

 Since we are talking about times when Serbia was in economic and 
 political chaos, it was hard to document illegal activities, being
 that government at that time did numerous illegal activities on
 their own.

I think this article should be deleted and written again by the credible, objective people dealing with historical facts, not just claims from the Western propaganda. 213.244.195.24 01:20, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

 I think this article is OK, but needs to be put in chronilogical 
 order as someone mentioned earlier.

This article is getting better but it's still long way from sounding like it was written from a neutral point of view.--212.200.204.254 18:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

130.111.248.43 20:12, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] History of "Arkan" name

The edit which I made concerns Arkan's brutal torture on a non-Serb population. I know this to be untrue, the Tigers had long included Macedonians, Montenegrins, Slav-descended people from the smaller minorities from all republics who did not declare themselves Serbian, as well as a smaller number of Croats and Slovenes.

His ultimate role was not to break Serbia away from the federation but to maintain the federation as Yugoslavia, as such, some of the people who lost their lives were Serbians suspected of the same motives - wishing to break away. Ragusan 15 October 2005

Nobody is saying that Serbia wanted to break away from the federation. But at the same time his ultimate role was not to conserve the federation, since he was not an official member of the JNA (Yugoslav Peoples Army) nor his unit was an official affiliate to the JNA. His presence in Vukovar before, during and after Vukovar Hospital massacre is not an accident.

As I said before, during the war time, many dubious agreements were made involving official army and para-military forces. Since all of 1990s were murky and chaotic, it is very difficult to trace back via documents and written statements who was where and what they were doing at times. Arkan was a protege of the government for years, before being eliminated himself, and therefor it would be unlikely to find something damaging, since they probably made sure that not too many things we'll be linked back to them.

But based on various witnesses' accounts, it is highly unlikely that Arkan chased non-Serb population around with cookies and milk.

130.111.248.43 20:27, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

I've listed this page for cleanup for the reasons listed above, as well as the complete lack of sources and the weasel terms that pass for NPOV. Quinnanya 04:46, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

The part where the author tried to literally translate Arkan's quotes is hillarious. Can somebody get authorization to re-grammatize it? Plus : the number of weasel words and references to his alleged criminal life is way beneath a respectful wikipedia article.

[edit] Vinnie Jones to play "Arkan" in "The Filthy War."

Someone should put that in.

I agree this is important, however, it should also be mentioned the film is a largely fictional, dramatized account and serves to execute a general anti-serb bias. NEMT 02:56, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photos and "Arkan" name origin

Two questions, why were all of the photos of Arkan removed from the article? I know some were not freely usable (from the famous blood and honey photography series) however I'm pretty sure some of them were. Also, perhaps some mention of where the nickname "Arkan" came from, all said now is some obscure reference to a yet unnamed comic book. NEMT 02:56, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pov statements need source

I've removed the statements "of criminals and terrorists" and "as well as all sorts of criminals and dogs-of-war seeking refuge, roberry and easy loot." because it seems POV if this statement has a source then put it up with the source.

[edit] POV and uncited facts

This article is still full of NPOV violations and a lot of the information is uncited, I have begun to add {{fact}} tags where references and sources are needed, and I encourage others to do the same. --NEMT 14:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Summary: Attrocities?

Personally, I've never even heard of Željko Ražnatović, but if the article repeatedly mentions that he is known to have been involved in attrocities, shouldn't that be included in the summary paragraph at the top? -- TheMightyQuill 11:29, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

It's spelled atrocities not attrocities and we're long way from learning the truth about his involvement in the atrocities you've mentioned (If any).

[edit] Intro

An annon keeps on inserting the funny but unencyclopedic list of Arkan's achievements:

and also folk hero, nationalist politician, assembly representative, war profiteer, chief mafia boss, black market businessman, private proprietor, manager of a soccer club and caterer. Prior to that he had been a juvenile delinquent, street rowdy, wandering adventurer, bank robber, mobster, secret police agent, hitman, gambler, soccer fans leader and ice-cream shop owner.

"War criminal and mobster" pretty much summarize it all. Nothing of the above stands out of that simple profile. Duja 12:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd say that Arkan definately wasn't a man you could sum up just a few words. My first problem is the term mobster. He was never a high-profile mobster: there were always more powerful and wealthier people than he was. I'm starting to think that after reading this article people from the West will think of Arkan as a Serbian John Gotti. The thing with Arkan is very simple: he was allowed to do some things that he usually wouldn't be allowed in return for the actions he took under the orders of the Serbian National Security agency (during both the 80s and the 90s). As for the term 'paramilitary leader', I say it should be out of the picture for good as his Volunteer Guard wasn't a paramilitary unit. Arkan was given the ordered to start the unit by Jovica Stanišić and Franko Simatović, who were at the time high officials of the Serbian National Security Agency and the Guard was responsible to the command of the Territorial Defense (it is a historical fact so I don't see why someone keeps removing that).--212.200.204.254 18:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal Quotes Section

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%C5%BDeljko_Ra%C5%BEnatovi%C4%87&oldid=61728375

The above is the last instance before the quotes were removed. Why was this done? The quotes were one of the best parts of the article and a very interesting reflection on his character and the way that he was percieved by some of the people around him. This should be put back IMO.

I agree, I am going to restore the quote section. All Editors: Please do not remove it without discussing why first. --NEMT 03:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I removed the quotes and gave my reasons why. Although I agree they are very fascinating, a huge list of unsourced quotes does not belong in a wikipedia article. Refer to the guidelines stated in the Wikipedia:Quotations article:

"If there are many quotations, please move them to Wikiquote and place a Wikiquote template on the article to inform readers that there are relevant quotations regarding the subject."

Check out Arkan's new wikiquote page, which I just created. There is a link to the wikiquote page at the bottom of the wikipedia article. You may want to consider adding a small number of particularly relevant, properly sourced quotes to the article instead.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 09:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Having added a few of the quotes myself, I can say some of them are taken directly from the BBC interview given as an external link. Would you be against including those somewhere? --NEMT 14:06, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I, of course, don't have any more say around here than the next person; I was merely pointing out some Wikipedia guidelines. In any case, I like the way you used relevant, sourced quotes to introduce each section. My opinion is that this producees a higher quality article than the previous version featuring a large, disorganized collection of quotes.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 15:09, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Man of steel

A hero to people of the orthodox faith everywhere. We will not take IMPERIALISM lying down.--86.143.173.80 (talk • contribs)

How about bending over?--172.181.83.132 (talk • contribs)

“Man of steel”? Mmmm…--MaGioZal 22:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

What's the point of this discussion, please? --TheFEARgod (Ч) 00:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources needed

Once a Citation Needed tag is entered, a decent time should pass before the statement is removed. Nevertheless, the burden is on the original poster of the statement to provide a source. If there is no source, then basically the statement in question can be deleted with no further ado. That is my opinion, and I am stuck with it. Sincerely, and with great good faith, your friend, GeorgeLouis 15:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV, POV, POV…

Arkan's successes on the battlefield were invariably followed by accusations by losing parties in the conflict, claims which formed a principal element in anti-Serb propaganda, fully supported and echoed by key Western powers, who sided against Serbs in every conflict during the 1990s. A number of battles over towns in the Serb Republic, today a constituent part of the former Yugoslav republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, were invariably followed by claims on the part of the losing side, the Bosnian Muslims, of committing various atrocities that ranged from murder, rape to looting. And yet, unlike several major political and military figures similarly accused by Serbs' various enemies in and outside of the Balkans, Arkan was only indicted for warcrimes by the so-called court of the NATO powers, the ICTY, after their invasion of Serbia in 1999.

This paragraph — and the other two below it:

The notoriety of Serb forces, of which Arkan's Tigers were only one group, was advanced in great part by the NATO powers which supported the various political platforms, and territorial claims of Yugoslav secessionists. Outright diplomatic support for the independence of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, was immediately followed by a program of systematic demonization of Serbs resisting the outright attempts to ethnically cleanse, or otherwise destroy, their communities. During the period of the Yugoslav wars between 1991-1995, the various propaganda claims of Serbs' military opponents would find a ready echo in the mainstream media of the NATO member states which were already involved in a program of lending military support to those same parties, if at first covertly.

And yet, actual objective evidence of alleged atrocities provided by anti-Serb propaganda is not only meagre, but highly suspect besides. For example, Anti-Serb propaganda has tried to make much of one isolated image, taken by an Israel photographer during the civil conflict in the city of Bijeljina showing a Tiger verifying the death of a civilian by inspecting it with his foot. The photograph was almost uniformly interpreted by various Western media not so much as proof that the particular paramilitary was responsible for the death of that one civilian, so much as Serbs as a whole were most responsible for the outbreak of war in the former Yugoslavia. This method, which involved extrapolating any number of wide-ranging charges against the legitimate defense forces of the Serb Republic and the Serb Republic of Krajina from photographs of isolated incidents, and out of all proportion to the incident actually documented, served as a constant feature of anti-Serb propaganda and agitation during the entire period of the 1990s, and well on into the 21st century.

Are absolutely POV, absolutely unencyclopedic, absolutely non-informative, absolute rubbish. These three paragraphs deserve deletion.--MaGioZal 12:45, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

And the term alleged and anti-Serb propaganda appears a lot of times in the entire text. Come on, people, Al Capone was never officaly convicted for the lots of assassinations and robberies he commited (we went to Alcatraz for being caught on tax evasion), but everybody knew he was a mobster.--MaGioZal 13:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I’ve just made the (not yet complete) revision of the article. It’s here. I just hope that it will not completely reverted without discussion just some minutes after.--MaGioZal 14:19, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Delete. Rewrite in the process. --PaxEquilibrium 22:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../%C5%BE/e/l/Talk%7E%C5%BDeljko_Ra%C5%BEnatovi%C4%87_fab1.html"

Category: Start-Class military history articles