This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Air Force of the Independent State of Croatia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Air Force of the Independent State of Croatia has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have added a table listing the operational aircraft of the Croatian Air Force, together with some references. Oz Cro ( talk) 06:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I have added some new sections to the Article dealing with some referenced detail of the aircraft and operations of the ZNDH. Oz Cro ( talk) 17:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I have added some aircraft images. Would like to find some in ZNDH livery. Oz Cro ( talk) 06:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
I reassessed this article as mid importance. This has nothing to do with the article quality, which is assessed on a separate scale (B class, at the moment). High importance for this article is simply not warranted: it is not more important than, say, Croatian Home Guard (mid importance), and its importance is far below Independent State of Croatia itself (high importance). GregorB ( talk) 19:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the paragraph refering to four ZNDH "Generals" as there seems to be some problem with its authenticity. I have linked Vladimir Kren and will await an outcome regarding the accuracy of the paragraph's information. Oz Cro ( talk) 12:11, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I have made several edits on this article regarding the use of the words Croatia and Croatian. The NDH was far larger than modern Croatia and the use of the term Croatia in this context is POV and potentially confusing to the reader. The NDH is a unique period in the history of the Croatian people and it should be clear in all articles relating to the NDH that we are not talking about Croatia, but the Axis puppet state. I have made a number of edits to this article on that basis. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 07:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
The lede states that the Zrakoplovstvo Nezavisne Drzave Hrvatske ("Air Force of the Independent State of Croatia") was renamed into "Croatian Battle Air Force". "Croatian Battle Air Force" is a relatively bad translation of "Hrvatsko bojno zrakoplovstvo".
So if we wanted to translate completely literally, "Hrvatsko bojno zrakoplovstvo" would be "Croatian Battle Aviation". If we wanted to convey the meaning of the middle word most accurately, we would use "Croatian Combat Aviation" or "Croatian Military Aviation". However, "Battle Aviation" or "Military Aviation" is equivalent to "Air Force" in English. "Croatian Air Force" is probably the best translation of "Hrvatsko bojno zrakoplovstvo". And since that is the last name this military organization used, and for the greater period of time - we should move this article to Croatian Air Force (NDH) -- Director ( talk) 09:06, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
This article goes against MoS with its usage of images.
I feel like deleting all of them, but I suppose the text from their captions should be integrated into the article first. -- Director ( talk) 08:42, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
No need to make new section, just to add this - official language of the Air Force, and country of this air force was Croatian. Also, more then 90% of the populaton of present-day Croatia speaks Croatian, and more then 90% of the population of B-H speaks Bosnian, Croatian or Serbian. Speaksers of SC are very low. Adding SC language is highly disputed. Keep that in mind. -- Wusten fuchs 13:30, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Oz Cro, I know you invested a lot of effort in those images but imo you should have checked with the manual of style first. Please be aware:
Images of various plane models, such as a Bf-109 in Ohio, just because members of the Ustase air force flew those models somehwere 60 years ago - are not good examples of WP:PERTINENT images directly related to the article's subject. The Bf-109 model aircraft, in and of itself, has nothing to do with this air force. Not only that, but the images have displaced the main text in covering a lot of info - which is also very much against the recommendations of MoS. -- Director ( talk) 14:51, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks DIREKTOR, but don't worry about the effort involved. Rest assured that WP:PERTINENT was consulted and the images constructed to be those most significantly relevant to the article. This was to illustrate the uniqely eclectic nature of the aircraft of a little-known air force, as was presented in the text of the article. Oz Cro ( talk) 15:14, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Could we start by integrating the captions into the text somehow? -- Director ( talk) 14:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
DIREKTOR, I do understand what scientists think about it, and even there, at field of linguistics scientists aren't united in that oppinion, as I said it's disputed.
I'll also say another fact that Croatian language, no matter what you or scientist think about it, is internationaly recognized language. Since this subject is mostly conected to Croatia and Croats who speak Croatian language, we should add translation of Croatian language. Anything other could be understood as an inslult.
As encyclopedia, Wikipedia should follow this rule and not add disputed things. It's not about linguistic discussion here, if we would discuss languages, I could understand shuch way of editing. -- Wusten fuchs 16:51, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
I have quick failed the article and dropped its MilHist assessment to B-class because it is not sufficiently referenced. Each paragraph must have at least one citation covering the material in that paragraph.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 01:28, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
This article is still packed full with back-to-back text-ridden images that do not depict the subject matter. -- Director ( talk) 02:48, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Tidied up some of the layout and referencing problems in this section of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oz Cro ( talk • contribs) 06:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
"Air Force of the Independent State of Croatia" would seem to be a much more elegant name than the current one. Even "Croatian Air Force (1941–45)" or "Croatian Air Force (World War II)" would be more elegant. The current title is clunky and redundant: it tells us twice that this was a Croatian air force and requires seven words to do so. Srnec ( talk) 18:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
In the section above, an issue has been raised about the Croatian name used in the article as well. I didn't read the GA review before posting this, but it seems I'm not alone in thinking the article needs renaming. Srnec ( talk) 18:37, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
There are some inconsistencies in the aircraft model numbering and designations in this article. For example, some Do 17s are rendered as Do17, while others have the variant included (ie DO17E). The Messerschmitt Bf 109s are another example, some rendered as Messerschmitt 109G, but one is Messerschmitt Me-109G (in the table). The other aircraft models have similar consistency issues (notwithstanding the model differences, which should be included where the information is available). I suggest checking the sources and going through the article to ensure they are consistently presented, particularly before taking this article to MILHIST ACR. As an aside, can I just say that I consider the fact that someone has painted ZNDH markings on a restored Avia FL3 is a bit disturbing, and the inclusion of this pic in the article detracts from the strict neutrality that needs to be maintained on articles regarding the NDH? For me it was a line-ball decision on the neutrality criteria, but others may not see it that way. I don't think removing it would have any effect on the quality of the article, particularly as only 20 were operated by the ZNDH and they were used as trainers, not combat aircraft. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 02:51, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
A few post-GA suggestions for further improvements.
If I think of anything else I'll add it here. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 13:54, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
The two new pics have very doubtful "PD-Croatia" licensing, which is not ok on a GA. No author is provided, and no evidence of them being published. I have noted this on the files at Commons. I think their inclusion should be re-considered. Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 10:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
I have updated the table listing the operational aircraft of the Croatian Air Force, together with a newly published reference. Oz Cro ( talk) 13:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Air Force of the Independent State of Croatia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Air Force of the Independent State of Croatia has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have added a table listing the operational aircraft of the Croatian Air Force, together with some references. Oz Cro ( talk) 06:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I have added some new sections to the Article dealing with some referenced detail of the aircraft and operations of the ZNDH. Oz Cro ( talk) 17:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I have added some aircraft images. Would like to find some in ZNDH livery. Oz Cro ( talk) 06:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
I reassessed this article as mid importance. This has nothing to do with the article quality, which is assessed on a separate scale (B class, at the moment). High importance for this article is simply not warranted: it is not more important than, say, Croatian Home Guard (mid importance), and its importance is far below Independent State of Croatia itself (high importance). GregorB ( talk) 19:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the paragraph refering to four ZNDH "Generals" as there seems to be some problem with its authenticity. I have linked Vladimir Kren and will await an outcome regarding the accuracy of the paragraph's information. Oz Cro ( talk) 12:11, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I have made several edits on this article regarding the use of the words Croatia and Croatian. The NDH was far larger than modern Croatia and the use of the term Croatia in this context is POV and potentially confusing to the reader. The NDH is a unique period in the history of the Croatian people and it should be clear in all articles relating to the NDH that we are not talking about Croatia, but the Axis puppet state. I have made a number of edits to this article on that basis. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 07:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
The lede states that the Zrakoplovstvo Nezavisne Drzave Hrvatske ("Air Force of the Independent State of Croatia") was renamed into "Croatian Battle Air Force". "Croatian Battle Air Force" is a relatively bad translation of "Hrvatsko bojno zrakoplovstvo".
So if we wanted to translate completely literally, "Hrvatsko bojno zrakoplovstvo" would be "Croatian Battle Aviation". If we wanted to convey the meaning of the middle word most accurately, we would use "Croatian Combat Aviation" or "Croatian Military Aviation". However, "Battle Aviation" or "Military Aviation" is equivalent to "Air Force" in English. "Croatian Air Force" is probably the best translation of "Hrvatsko bojno zrakoplovstvo". And since that is the last name this military organization used, and for the greater period of time - we should move this article to Croatian Air Force (NDH) -- Director ( talk) 09:06, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
This article goes against MoS with its usage of images.
I feel like deleting all of them, but I suppose the text from their captions should be integrated into the article first. -- Director ( talk) 08:42, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
No need to make new section, just to add this - official language of the Air Force, and country of this air force was Croatian. Also, more then 90% of the populaton of present-day Croatia speaks Croatian, and more then 90% of the population of B-H speaks Bosnian, Croatian or Serbian. Speaksers of SC are very low. Adding SC language is highly disputed. Keep that in mind. -- Wusten fuchs 13:30, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Oz Cro, I know you invested a lot of effort in those images but imo you should have checked with the manual of style first. Please be aware:
Images of various plane models, such as a Bf-109 in Ohio, just because members of the Ustase air force flew those models somehwere 60 years ago - are not good examples of WP:PERTINENT images directly related to the article's subject. The Bf-109 model aircraft, in and of itself, has nothing to do with this air force. Not only that, but the images have displaced the main text in covering a lot of info - which is also very much against the recommendations of MoS. -- Director ( talk) 14:51, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks DIREKTOR, but don't worry about the effort involved. Rest assured that WP:PERTINENT was consulted and the images constructed to be those most significantly relevant to the article. This was to illustrate the uniqely eclectic nature of the aircraft of a little-known air force, as was presented in the text of the article. Oz Cro ( talk) 15:14, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Could we start by integrating the captions into the text somehow? -- Director ( talk) 14:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
DIREKTOR, I do understand what scientists think about it, and even there, at field of linguistics scientists aren't united in that oppinion, as I said it's disputed.
I'll also say another fact that Croatian language, no matter what you or scientist think about it, is internationaly recognized language. Since this subject is mostly conected to Croatia and Croats who speak Croatian language, we should add translation of Croatian language. Anything other could be understood as an inslult.
As encyclopedia, Wikipedia should follow this rule and not add disputed things. It's not about linguistic discussion here, if we would discuss languages, I could understand shuch way of editing. -- Wusten fuchs 16:51, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
I have quick failed the article and dropped its MilHist assessment to B-class because it is not sufficiently referenced. Each paragraph must have at least one citation covering the material in that paragraph.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 01:28, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
This article is still packed full with back-to-back text-ridden images that do not depict the subject matter. -- Director ( talk) 02:48, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Tidied up some of the layout and referencing problems in this section of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oz Cro ( talk • contribs) 06:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
"Air Force of the Independent State of Croatia" would seem to be a much more elegant name than the current one. Even "Croatian Air Force (1941–45)" or "Croatian Air Force (World War II)" would be more elegant. The current title is clunky and redundant: it tells us twice that this was a Croatian air force and requires seven words to do so. Srnec ( talk) 18:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
In the section above, an issue has been raised about the Croatian name used in the article as well. I didn't read the GA review before posting this, but it seems I'm not alone in thinking the article needs renaming. Srnec ( talk) 18:37, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
There are some inconsistencies in the aircraft model numbering and designations in this article. For example, some Do 17s are rendered as Do17, while others have the variant included (ie DO17E). The Messerschmitt Bf 109s are another example, some rendered as Messerschmitt 109G, but one is Messerschmitt Me-109G (in the table). The other aircraft models have similar consistency issues (notwithstanding the model differences, which should be included where the information is available). I suggest checking the sources and going through the article to ensure they are consistently presented, particularly before taking this article to MILHIST ACR. As an aside, can I just say that I consider the fact that someone has painted ZNDH markings on a restored Avia FL3 is a bit disturbing, and the inclusion of this pic in the article detracts from the strict neutrality that needs to be maintained on articles regarding the NDH? For me it was a line-ball decision on the neutrality criteria, but others may not see it that way. I don't think removing it would have any effect on the quality of the article, particularly as only 20 were operated by the ZNDH and they were used as trainers, not combat aircraft. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 02:51, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
A few post-GA suggestions for further improvements.
If I think of anything else I'll add it here. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 13:54, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
The two new pics have very doubtful "PD-Croatia" licensing, which is not ok on a GA. No author is provided, and no evidence of them being published. I have noted this on the files at Commons. I think their inclusion should be re-considered. Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 10:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
I have updated the table listing the operational aircraft of the Croatian Air Force, together with a newly published reference. Oz Cro ( talk) 13:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)