Talk:Sisak People's Liberation Partisan Detachment

To admins

Pls rename this article to "Sisak Partisan Detachment", because that is the correct translation of croatian "odred". There is text about it in Yugoslav Military Encyclopedia (croatian: Vojna enciklopedija), Vol. 8, page 591 under the title "Sisački NOP odred", i.e. "Sisak National Liberation Partisan Detachment. --Gorran 15:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

First anti-fascist armed unit

In Croatia - yes. In Europe - I'm not so sure. Early branches of Armia Krajowa may be older. GregorB 21:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

They certainly are, see for example Służba Zwycięstwu Polski, created in September 1939. I have removed this claim.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The claim is not that this was the first resistance movement in occupied Europe (which it most certainly is not), but the first real resistance military unit in occupied Europe. I can't find any corroboration at the moment, but I will try later. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 10:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

the Polish TAP had 4,000 armed members in 1940. This is claim is unsupportable. Peacemaker67 (talk) 12:37, 10 January 2012 (UTC).

See below discussion re a reliable source in English (V&T) that says these territorially based detachments of the Partisans were not true military units. The claim is pointless (and highly dubious) if the TAP had equivalent armed groups operating in Poland more than a year earlier. It just looks distinctly un-NPOV at present. I have made a couple of small changes, but I think the claim re the first real resistance military unit in occupied Europe is clearly contradicted by a combination of V&T p. 88 and the existence of the TAP well before this detachment was formed. Peacemaker67 (talk) 11:04, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

first military partisan unit of yugoslav partisans ( people liberation army )

This group was the first military partisan unit formed in the area of the later yugoslavia. But it was not the first unit (founderunit) of the of the later called People's Liberation Army where the wikilink was going to. The firs unit of the later called People's Liberation Army was the 1st Proletarian Assault Brigade formed 21. December 1941. There is no proof of a relation between the sisak group and the founding of the Yugoslav partisans under Tito ( the later called People's Liberation Army ). I deleted this wrong information out of the article. regards Seader (talk) 23:30, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

You are quite confused with regard to Yugoslav Partisans and WWII Yugoslav history. Suffices to say, no, this was the first Partisan military unit, and not the 1st Proletarian, which was formed well after even such major conflicts as the First Enemy Offensive. The information you removed is sourced, do not alter it again. -- Director (talk) 00:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

<UPDATE>: "My mistake. I misunderstood the information and only considered the People liberation army without the Partisan Detachments of Yugoslavia". regards Seader (talk) 11:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC) </Update> I am not confused. I think there is a misunderstanding. Sry for that. Yes the sisak unit was the first partisan military unit, but was not the first unit of the Yugoslav Partisans led by the communist party. There is no proofen relation between the sisak unit and the founding of the Yugoslav Partisans (later called liberation army). If there is one then please show me. I repeat: I do not say that the sisak unit was not the first partisan unit in the area of the later yugoslavia. It was the first. But there is no proofen relationship between the founding of the yugoslavian liberation army (Tito-Partisans) and the sisak unit. For this you can see also the article Yugoslav Partisans. Also the information that this event launched the anti-fascist resistance in the rest of Yugoslavia is not sourced. In croatia yes but in the whole rest of yugoslavia too? Even without the sisak unit the League of Communists of Yugoslavia would have decided to create the main staff of the liberation movement under Tito at 27. June 1941 which was later called the liberation army of yugoslavia (Vlado Strugar: Rat i revolucija naroda Jugoslavije, 1941–1945. Vojno-istorijski institut, Belgrade 1962, p. 357.). This information needs a source. And the first in whole yugoslavia operating military unit which was found under Tito was the 1st Proletarian Assault Brigade. The yugoslav partisans had other fighting units before but this was the first in the hole area of yugoslavia operating. To say the sisak unit was the first unit of the Yugoslav Partisans (officially the People's Liberation Army) is wrong because then it looks like the sisak group was the founding unit of the whole yugoslav partisan movement led by the Communist Party of Yugoslavia. The sisak unit was found on 22th. June, 5 days before the Communist Party of Yugoslavia found on 27th. June 1941 their partisan movement which later formed the People's Liberation Army. This two movements were found independently from each other. And that is the reason why it is wrong to write "This first unit of the Yugoslav Partisans" with the link to Yugoslav Partisans where in the first sentence is written "officially the People's Liberation Army". I could not find a proof in literature which says that the sisak group was the first unit ( or founding unit ) of the yugoslav partisans which were led by the communist party under their commander Tito. That is the picture the reader gets when he reads this: "This first unit of the Yugoslav Partisans". I hope you can now understand what I mean. I deleted the link but let the information stay that it was the first partisan unit in the area of the later yugoslavia. The link to the Yugoslav Partisans is given in the section "See also" anyway. If there is still a disagreement then I would say that we could ask for a Wikipedia:Third opinion or do you have an other formulation proposal? Do you have any literature about what happened to ths sisak group anway? In the literature I found about the founding of the liberation army the sisak group was not even mentioned in any relation to the liberation army. regards Seader (talk) 01:18, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

This is not my opinion. I am going from the literature I have. If it is sourced that it was the first unit of the yugoslav partisans led by the communist party than I want to see the source. Please show it to me, because I do not have found it yet. If not I will revert it back. regards Seader (talk) 09:43, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Look, here's the deal. #1 please stop WP:EDIT-WARRING, and removing sourced information, or you will be reported. #2 I understand perfectly what you mean, and it makes no sense. A lot of it. The unit was founded and led by Vladimir Janić "Capo", one of the members of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia (CKKPJ). And the Partisans founded a great many units before December 1941. #3 You could write and entire essay here about your opinions, if you like, it would not impress anyone particularly. You need sources for your claims, and good ones. (I wrote much of the Yugoslav Partisans article, so I certainly don't know what you mean when you refer to it.)

The source is listed in the article, of course. You can post a WP:3O if you like but there would be no point. -- Director (talk) 09:49, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you mean this source: "Pavličević, Dragutin (2007). Povijest Hrvatske."? If yes. Which page? regards Seader (talk) 09:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Again: the unit was formed by Vladimir Janić "Capo", a CKKPJ member, and Marijan Cvetković the local communist party official. I refuse to waste my time further on this issue. -- Director (talk) 09:55, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

What? I am just asking you for the source of the information that the sisak group was founded under the command of Tito. Vlado Strugar wrote in "Rat i revolucija naroda Jugoslavije, 1941–1945" (1962) page 357 about the founding of Partisan movement of the communist party that the decision to found the main staff of the liberation movement under the command of Tito was 27.th June 1941. This was 5 days after the sisak group was found. Yes the partisans founded many groups but in december they founded the first in the hole area of yugoslavia operating unit. But still in no literature source (till now I almost only have german sources) I found the information that the sisak group was founded under the command of Tito. Please say me what the source of this information is. The linked articles from the other wikipedias do not work as sources. If this is true than there is nothing in the german literature about that. The sisak group is not getting metnioned in the literature here in any relation to the communist partisan movement under Tito. So help me please to increase my knowledge with supplying me with information about the literature. regards Seader (talk) 10:05, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

"What"? You don't understand? Again then: the unit was founded, formed and led by Vladimir Janić "Capo", a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia (CKKPJ), also with the assistance of Marijan Cvetković the chief communist party official for Sisak. As we say in ex-Yugoslavia, even the birds on the trees know that this units was the first Partisan formation. Unless you start bringing in sources that specifically support these extraordinary claims of yours (not some WP:OR nonsense), I'm done here.

• "...Yugoslav partisans under Tito (the later called People's Liberation Army)"

No. The full name of the Partisan movement was the "People's Liberation Army and Partisan Detachments of Yugoslavia". The "Partisan Detachments" were relatively static, local formations, (such as the 1st Sisak Partisan Detachment), whereas the "People's Liberation Army" consisted of fully mobile units such as the Proletarian brigades.

• "The first unit of the later called People's Liberation Army was the 1st Proletarian Assault Brigade formed 21. December 1941."

Yes, and while the "People's Liberation Army" probably was founded as late as December 1941, the Yugoslav Partisans, as a movement, were founded on June 22 1941, with its first Partisan detachment. That is probably why you're confused.

• "Yes the sisak unit was the first partisan military unit, but was not the first unit of the Yugoslav Partisans led by the communist party. There is no proofen relation between the sisak unit and the founding of the Yugoslav Partisans (later called liberation army)."

This unit was actually founded and led by a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia, which was led by Tito (the head of the Central Committee).

-- Director (talk) 10:14, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah I see now my error in reasoning. I did a mistake and only thought about the People's Liberation Army.In the german wikipedia which I read before there was no article about the whole partisan movement but only about the People liberation army and in my literature which is only about the liberation army under Tito too it is written that the fighting units Tito founded as the commander of the main staff (which was founded 5 days after the group in sisak by the communist party of yugoslavia (source: Vlado Strugar)) of the liberation movement led by the communist party later called themselfs People Liberation Army. So I understood the information in the article as if the sisak unit was the first liberation army unit found under the command of Tito. But if you look at the whole partisan movement ( not only the liberation army ) then the sisak unit fits into the picture. I mistakenly only though about the liberation army under Tito and not about the whole partisan movement. The Yugoslav Partisans, as a movement, were of course founded earlier than the liberation army. You are right with what you wrote at point 2 that thats were the confusion comes from. Thank you for your patience and for helping me understand my mistake. You can delete my nonsense up there if you like. regards Seader (talk) 11:25, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

You may want to modify the wording, DIREKTOR. Vucinich & Tomasevich say 'the formation of true military units, available for operations in any area where the leadership might employ them, was begun by the Partisans on December 21, 1941, when the first proletarian brigade was formed.' p. 88. Earlier on the same page they talk about what they mean by a Partisan detachment, not regularly organised and limited to a territory, and differentiate such a detachment from a military unit. Peacemaker67 (talk) 10:44, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

@Peacemaker. Didn't I just say that above? Yes, the mobile formations were created around the end of 1941. But a military unit is no less a unit if its static rather than mobile. A "unit" ("jedinica" in Serbo-Croatian) is defined as "a part of a military establishment that has a prescribed organization (as of personnel and materiel)" [1]. Do they perhaps differentiate a "detachment", as being static, from a mobile unit ("true military units, available for operations in any area where the leadership might employ them")?

@Seader. Terribly sorry for my gruff demeanor, Seader, please accept my apologies. Its been a tough morning and I was somewhat annoyed and in a hurry... No hard feelings? :) -- Director (talk) 11:42, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

This is absolutely no problem I can completely understand that. No I have no hard feelings at all. Everything is fine. Thx again for explaining. :) regards Seader (talk) 11:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Direktor, this is my point exactly. The article is not about a military unit because Partisan detachments were not created with a prescribed establishment of personnel and materiel. They were ad hoc, and as V&T observe, were staffed and organised as the local commander saw fit. That was not the case with the Partisan brigades. What the Sisak detachment perhaps were was the first armed anti-fascist detachment in occupied Yugoslavia, although even that seems a big call given this was a detachment consisting almost entirely of Croats and on the basis of one source who was a Croatian historian whose work has not been not translated into English. The occupied Europe claim is unsustainable, particularly given the various Polish guerilla detachments that arose immediately after the invasion of that country, including one that destroyed a German battalion well before Yugoslavia was invaded.

Hmm. I'm not convinced. While they were independent formations, the Partisans, or rather the CPY, did indeed have guidelines as to how their detachments were to be formed and organized. I remember reading they were derived from the Spanish Civil War. The question is, do V&T explicitly state Partisan detachments were not military units? -- Director (talk) 20:47, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

read it and tell me what think. http://books.google.com.au/books?id=a--6hauBIb4C&pg=PA88&lpg=PA88&vq=DetachmentS&output=html_text

Peacemaker67 (talk) 07:52, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

V&T say the rules for the makeup of Partisan detachments were not put together until the Stolice conference in Sep 41, and whilst they refer to them as units, they also make it clear that they were not 'true military units'. On that basis, the Sisak detachment was not a true military unit and as it was not subject to the rules that came out of Stolice (at least not until Sep 41), it was also not formed and organised in accordance with those rules. Peacemaker67 (talk) 12:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

So they're "units", but not "true units". How about we use "military formation"? -- Director (talk) 12:33, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

that means something else entirely, a formation is of brigade size or larger. We are talking about a company (-) here. I suggest armed anti-fascist resistance unit, but the occupied Europe bit has to go.Peacemaker67 (talk) 19:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

"Resistance unit" is fine. But why does the occupied Europe bit "have to go". Do you have any reason to believe the source is unreliable? -- Director (talk) 19:56, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Europe began to be occupied when Poland was invaded in 1939, and there were numerous armed Polish anti-fascist resistance units formed there well before Yugoslavia was even invaded. One leader known as 'Hubal', fought the Germans from the time of Polish defeat in late 1939 until April 1940 with a group of 200 mounted troops. Hempel ('Poland in WWII: An Illustrated Military History', Hippocrene Books, New York, 2005 pages 18 & 24) states that men like Captain Henryk Dobrzański aka Hubal of the Cavalry Brigade 'Wolkowysk' did not accept defeat and in small units carried on armed resistance against the Germans, still wearing their Polish uniforms. Hubal's unit was formed in 1939, and he was killed and his unit largely dispersed in April 1940. Davies ('Rising '44: the battle for Warsaw', Pan MacMillan, 2003) states that 'Hubal' kept a group of 200 cavalrymen in the field through the winter of 1939-1940 and fought several pitched battles with the Germans until he was hunted down. The 'Historical dictionary of Poland, 966-1945' also provides some biographical info about 'Hubal' and states on p 116 that he was the commander of the the first Polish Army guerilla unit. Also p. 9 of 'Axis Cavalry in WW2'. These are all in English, all except the dictionary are authored or edited by non-Poles. I have to say in the face of that amount of evidence, I consider that these sources bring the reliability of the Croatian source on this issue into serious question. As I said earlier, this is a Croatian historian publishing in Croatia in Croatian making a highly dubious claim clearly contradicted by implication in multiple reliable non-Polish sources in English published outside Poland. Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:28, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Haha, I see :). -- Director (talk) 13:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Language code

The appropriate language code for WW2 in Yugoslavia is Serbo-Croatian. Two IP editors have recently changed this to Croatian. I have reverted these edits. Please discuss here, as any further reverts will be reported for edit warring. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:09, 24 November 2012 (UTC)