Talk:Serbian campaign

Breaking down this big monster

This article is way too long and confusing, it should be divided into three articles: As an example, this is the way it is on the French wiki and it works pretty well (in my opinion):

• Serbian Campaign of 1914
• Serbian Campaign of 1915
• Serbian Campaign of 1918

Aeengath (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

This article looks at the 1914-1915 (which is more or less a "continuous") campaign. The 1918 liberation (not really much fighting) is covered in Liberation of Serbia, Albania and Montenegro (1918). Only as an "epilogue" is the post 1915-fate of Serbia mentioned in the english 1914/15 article (with a link to the 1918 liberation). So I dont see how this article is confusing at all since it follows the battles in Serbia from the start of the hostiles in 1914 to the end of the campaign in 1915, with a mention of Serbia's aftermath at the end, also linking to the 1918 liberation)... --Havsjö (talk) 14:31, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

With all due respect for all the work you have put in this article there is still room from improvement... this was far from a continuous campaign...read Buttar, Hall, Dinardo, Glenny...just the defeat of the Austro-Hungarian army in 1914 ranks as one of the great upsets of modern military history and deserves its own article Aeengath (talk) 19:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 31 August 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 12:51, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Serbian campaign → Serbia during World War I – The current title is too vague and doesn't even mention the war in which Serbia was involved. The current proposal mimics the WWI-related articles of adjacent countries (Bulgaria during World War I, Romania during World War I, etc.) Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:25, 31 August 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 16:00, 8 September 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. BD2412 T 20:39, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

But this article is about the 1914-1915 "Serbia campaign", not Serbia internal workings and overall situation of WW1. A more proper title could be "Serbian campaign (World War I)" --Havsjö (talk) 18:29, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

• We would need a merger between this one and the related article, and renaming could take place afterwards. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 23:15, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

It would make total sense as this article looks at the whole war period from beginning to end not just at the different campaigns, I re-wrote the whole intro a few times. As I have stated before there was more than one Serbian Campaign, right now it feels like a big macédoine with everything that happened before after and in between; not surprising since the Campaign of 1914 took place between July and December, the Campaign of 1915 from October 1915 to January 1916 and the last campaign aka the liberation of the country from September to November 1918, hardly one continuous event. With the appropriate title, it will finally be easier to work on this period and turn this page into the quality article it deserves to be. I agree with Sadko that a merger would be best. Aeengath (talk) 06:30, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

If this article became "Serbia in WW1" it would have to focus on Serbia's internal situation a lot and so on as well, not just the military campaign which took place on Serbian soil. The article as it is now is obviously about the campaign(s) in the beginning of the war that eventually led to its conquest, with only a footnote about the later liberation, which has its own article as part of the battles of the Macedonian front. Compare the "Bulgaria in WW1" article, its about Bulgarias military situation and internal workings/politics. Not the same type of article as this. A "Serbia in WW1" article about Serbias situation specifically and probably with a lot of info regarding the path towards the creation of Yugoslavia seems like another type of article than what this article is about... This is about the 1914-1915 campaign(s)/conquest taking place in Serbia (+ Montenegro), but not "Serbia in WW1" --Havsjö (talk) 15:10, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

• Weak oppose per earlier comments. An article "Serbia in World War I" might be a good idea (akin to Romania during World War I) but it'd be a new article, covering the political / social situation as well, and maybe a bit of the Salonika front as it related to Serbia in 1918. If there's a feeling the current title is confusing, then a hatnote should solve that? Or at absolute worst, a move to Serbian campaign, 1914–1915 or the like. SnowFire (talk) 16:26, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose this would change the scope of the article, which hasn't been agreed. The Serbian campaign ran from 1914 to 1915, Serbia in WWI would run for the whole war and include a lot of stuff not currently within scope. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:27, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support That’s exactly where the confusion is, at the moment this article runs from 1914 to 1918 ie the whole length of the war. There wasn’t one Serbian Campaign but three: July to December 1914 the failed Austro-Hungarian invasions, October 1915 to January 1916 the successful Central Powers invasion and occupation and September to November 1918 the Franco-Serb offensive that liberated the country. Therefore we could call it Serbian Campaigns of WWI or break it down into three articles, one for each campaign, like on the German and French wiki and turn Serbian Campaign into a disambiguation page. To make it into Serbia during WWI would not require much change, there are two consequent articles about occupied Serbia that can be used to add the missing stuff to start with.Aeengath (talk) 09:55, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

This article clearly does not runt form 1914 to 1918 at the moment... It runs from the start of war with Serbia in 1914 to its full conquest at the end of 1915 (with a footnote about the aftermath), i.e. what is commonly referred to as the "Serbia Campaign". The 1918 liberation was not a "campaign", and barely even a "battle". Just armies marching in and liberating Serbia without much opposition following the collapse of the Macedonian Front (and that front has its own article and is not part of the "Serbian Campaign" talked about in this article). Sure you can say the 1914-1915 invasions were 2 campaigns, but its not exactly confusing currently, since the article clearly divides up the 2 "phases" in both the article and the infobox. Those "2 campaigns" could be divided up, but its not exactly "wrong" to present this as two phases of the same overall campaign (i.e. Central powers attack to conquer Serbia) (with aforementioned distinction between them in the article already). Nevertheless, the article is not about Serbia 1914-1918 currently, as you claim. And to just add info about the occupation between 1915 and the footnote about the 1918 liberation does not create a "Serbia in WW1" article, as it lacks a ton of info about Serbia's internal political situation and which led to the creation of Yugoslavia at the end of the war. And if that was then also added, the very "non-Serbian" perspective from the battles is out of place. It becomes just an article about battles occurring on Serbian land or a strange mix --Havsjö (talk) 13:50, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Well the article clearly used to say 1914-1918 in the infobox until a few days ago… you must be aware of that… what you call a footnote about the aftermath is a subsection going all the way to 1918, it's hard to understand how this massive period classified as an aftermath of the campaign. Just adding about the occupation would not create a "Serbia in WW1" article it would only be something to start with, obviously it would require a lot of work, maybe Amanuensis Balkanicus has a better idea since he is the one who requested that change, not me. I could explain the different Campaigns here but this is not the topic. Aeengath (talk) 16:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support current title fails WP:CRITERIA as a recognisable title. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:05, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. Doesn't fit the scope and there is no consensus to change the scope. Not opposed to a rename, since the current title is rather opaque. We could use an article on Serbia in World War I. Srnec (talk) 13:05, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
• At the moment the confusion starts with having two campaigns crammed into one infobox. It's so hard to understand and link other articles to it. I suggest breaking it down into two articles, one for each campaign. This article could be renamed Serbian campaign (1914) (since most of its content concerns that first campaign therefore the same scope) and a new Serbian campaign (1915) would cover the second campaign and could be expanded. Just like it is on the French Wikipedia: Serbian campaign (1914) & Serbian campaign (1915) and on the German Wikipedia: Serbian campaign 1914 & Serbian campaign by the Central Powers. Havsjö is probably not going to like that but it was hardly a continuous campaign: in 1914 the Strafexpedition was planned, controlled and concluded by Austria with the goal of punishing Serbia, almost a year later, the Second campaign was planned and conducted with Germany, it was the idea of German chief of staff, Falkenhayn under German commander August von Mackensen, with the goal of opening a land route to the Ottoman Empire, it involved the combined efforts of Germany, Austria–Hungary, and Bulgaria. it was different planning, conduct and conclusion. In my humble opinion it makes total sense to separate them. And yes Srnec is right a proper article about Serbia in WW1 is badly needed Aeengath (talk) 12:15, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

We could split the article, but I fear that events between the 1914 and 1915 campaigns may get lost (as in, where would they belong?). This article is not really about a singular campaign (another mark against the current title), but it is about a singular front (at least as unified as the Eastern Front). I support some sort of rename and would not object to a split, but splitting should probably happen only in conjunction with the creation of a general article on Serbia in WWI. Srnec (talk) 16:36, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

There are no events between the 1914 and 1915 campaigns in the article right now, it only has a prelude about the buildup to the 1915 campaign. There is nothing about the coalition government of Pašić, the Skupština, the diplomatic efforts to revive good relations with Bulgaria, and more important the talks about postwar borders for a South Slav state. Serbia’s government was also pushing for the creation of a Yugoslav committee in exile. At the beginning of 1915, they found out about the promise made to Italy by the Entente, the treaty of London…etc all that important stuff belongs somewhere yes but it is not there so it wouldn’t get lost. Aeengath (talk) 18:54, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support renaming to "Serbia during World War I" because that would be a recognizable and unambiguous title, while present title ("Serbian campaign") has many different meanings. Sorabino (talk) 19:47, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. This is a purely military article about military campaigns. I expect "Serbia during World War I" to be a political and social history. There are better ways to disambiguate, e.g. "Serbian campaign (World War I)" or, if you want multiple campaigns, then either "Serbian front (World War I)", or split by date (as proposed earlier). Walrasiad (talk) 06:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Splitting proposal

As discussed in the discussion above, it would make great sense to split this article in order to distinguish the two, related but separate, Serbian campaigns thus giving these events the space they each deserve. Here is a quick summer-up of why:

The Serbian Campaign of 1914, aka the failed three Austro-Hungarian invasions, took place between July and December 1914. It was planned, controlled and concluded by Austria with the goal of punishing Serbia. Austro-Hungarian forces by Austrian General Oskar Potiorek numbered around 460,000 men, Serbian troops, numbered 400,000. The country was briefly occupied, It ended with a Serbian Victory. The defeat of the Austro-Hungarian army in Serbia in 1914 is probably one of the great upsets of modern military history.

The Serbian Campaign of 1915, the successful Central Powers invasion and occupation, took place almost a year later from October 1915 to January 1916, after other countries became involved in the Austro-Serb conflict. That Second campaign was planned and conducted with Germany, it was the idea of the German chief of staff, Falkenhayn with the goal of opening a land route to their Ottoman ally, it involved the combined efforts of Germany, Austria–Hungary, and Bulgaria. It was led by German commander August von Mackensen, with more than 600,000 men, Serbia had half that number. On the Entente side it also involved British and French units, it was a complete different planning, conduct and conclusion. It ended with the great serbian retreat and the occupation of Serbia by the Central Powers.

The aftermath subsections contain links to the main articles where that content can be moved.

Here is an example of the different campaigns on the French Wikipedia: Serbian campaign (1914) & Serbian campaign (1915) and on the German Wikipedia: Serbian campaign 1914 & Serbian campaign by the Central Powers - Thank you Aeengath (talk) 12:51, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support --Havsjö (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
• Support Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 16:05, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
• Tentative Support, however, I think that we need three articles:
  • Serbia in World War I – WP:SUMMARYSTYLE article outlining prelude, 1914 and 1915 campaign, Macedonian Front, and side events.
    • Serbian Campaign of 1914
    • Serbian Campaign of 1915

No such user (talk) 08:26, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes it makes sense to have a Serbia in World War I article, as stated in previous discussion. Aeengath (talk) 15:56, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

• Comment while I am supportive of the creation of the two new articles, in terms of the mechanics, I strongly recommend this article is renamed Serbia in World War I as it already has most of the content, and the 1914 and 1915 ones should be created as new articles using the material in this article as a starting point. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:00, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
• Support Vacant0 (talk) 19:19, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support The 1914 and 1915 campaigns are different enough to warrant their own pages. UncleBourbon (talk) 03:45, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support There is enough content for each campaign ReidMoffat (talk 04:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Serbian campaign split

I think it should be split — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.63.65 (talk) 00:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)