Talk:Gospić massacre

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MILHIST 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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] 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)

[edit] M.B. statement

Rjecina, 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 [1]" 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)

[edit] 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)