Talk:Croatian National Guard

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Croatian National Guard/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 16:58, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Guess I'll take this one for review too :) Initial comments up shortly... Dana boomer (talk) 16:58, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   • I've made a few copyedits. As always, feel free to revert any you disagree with.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   • While the information about the staffing, equipping and legislative history of the Guard is great, my biggest question when reading the article was: did they actually fight anyone? Other than the brief partial sentence "Following the capture of substantial stocks of weapons during the Battle of the Barracks," (which doesn't even specify that it was the Guard that captured the weapons), there is no mention of battles that they participated in, whether they won or lost, what their losses were, etc. There doesn't need to be detailed accounts of each battle, but something along the lines of "In August, the Guard participated in the Battle of XYZ. They won a decisive victory over the JNA, although they lost eight men in the course of the battle." or whatever the actual battles/results/casualties were would be sufficient.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Overall good, but see the comment above about content. Dana boomer (talk) 18:15, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the review and the excellent remark. I have added now the requested information. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 13:53, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Great! The new section is exactly what I was looking for. Everything now looks good, so I am passing the article to GA status. Nice work! Dana boomer (talk) 18:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Croatian National Guard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131109110402/http://www.hsd.hr/polemos/prvi/03.html to http://www.hsd.hr/polemos/prvi/03.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131130113147/http://www.hrvatski-vojnik.hr/hrvatski-vojnik/3892012/domovinskirat.asp to http://www.hrvatski-vojnik.hr/hrvatski-vojnik/3892012/domovinskirat.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131002133723/http://www.hrvatski-vojnik.hr/hrvatski-vojnik/772001/hrm.asp to http://www.hrvatski-vojnik.hr/hrvatski-vojnik/772001/hrm.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:59, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Mašićka Šagovina killings

If false, please oppose. If true, please link here.Xx236 (talk) 13:55, 4 February 2022 (UTC)