This article was nominated for deletion on 5 January 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to 7th SS Volunteer Mountain Division Prinz Eugen. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article does not appear to meet WP:NOTABILITY criteria, although some basic content might be merged into the 7th SS Volunteer Mountain Division Prinz Eugen article. The reasons are: 1. it lacks significant coverage except in a primary source (Kumm); 2. the only source for the actual operation is Otto Kumm's Vorwärts Prinz Eugen! Geschichte der 7.SS-Freiwilligen Gebirgs Division „Prinz Eugen”. Kumm was a divisional commander of the 7th SS, and cannot be considered a reliable or secondary source. 3. As far as reliable sources are concerned, a search for Operation Kopaonik on Google Books shows no hits other than self-references to this article- [1]
Any thoughts? Peacemaker67 ( talk) 04:56, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Again, here we have Peacemaker67 denying Chetniks their resistance efforts and representation of Yugoslavia ( diff). Peacemaker67 has insisted troughout time to be linked in any way to Yugoslavia, claiming to be an Australian who is just interested in history. However, such radical stances, tipical to be shared only by Croatian extremists and anti-Serbian movements, make it really irrelevant the origin and reasons for such biased views. We see a continuos insistence by the same user in denial of Chetniks resistance nature in a comment made here. I believe it is time to reexaminate the anti-Chetnik content that has been inserted and kept by force by Peacemaker67 in all articles related to Chetniks. Ultimatelly, the user has managed to eliminate Chetniks from all resistance lists in a sort of argument "they were mainly collaborators, hardly resistance movement, believe me, I have sources, ultimatelly, lets keep them out as controversial anyway". His insistence that Chetniks hardly made resistance activities and sistematically collaborated is the very one which was tryied to be inserted in articles and opposed, giving way to Draza Mihailovic mediation which concluded that description being wrong, and that after presentation of reliable sources, their collaboration was sporadic and oportunistic in nature. Of course there are sources saying they were evil collaborators, as there are sources prasing them as Allied heroes, so there was a need of someone uninvolved seing all sources and analising them by scholar weight, coming to wording that would be the most common and neutral. After 2 years in which it was mostly the side sharing Peacemaker67 view that created all sorts of obstacles including accusations and reporting, the mediators finally came to a conclusion and basically escaped. What happened next is that Peacemaker67 come out of nowhere and claimed neutrality while favoring their side. The mediation conclusions were ignored and they added their POV into the articles by force. After seing apsurds such as claiming that the Legion of Merit award refers only to the episody of airman saved, and not to overal resistance efforts, for me was enough to see that there was no real will to acomplish a balanced text, and alone as I was back then, my efforts were useless.
Further apsurds appear, for instance, in the insistence to deny as much as possible Chetniks relation with Yugoslavia, but present them exclusivelly as Serbian nationalist movement. The participation of other nationalities is ignored and denied. However, understanding the situation from a Serbian perspective is also ignored. One claiming they were Serbian nationalist movement could easily see Chetniks had no motive at all to collaborate. Germans in their Axis dominated world didn´t offer any single advantage to Serbia, or Serbs, rather the opposite. WWI was still present in the mind at that time, and Germans saw WWII in Yugoslavia as way of revenge for all the missfortune WWI has caused to Austria and Germany. Hitler grow-up seing his Austro-Hungarian empire being aniquilated in what was the consequence of what they expected to be an easy and quick victory over small Serbia back then. Serbs were at the very root of the terrible consequences that Allies imposed on Germany and Austria after the war, the very consequences that motivated Hitler to have the policies he had and do what he did. Serbs were ammong Jews and Russians the enemies to destroy. That is why Germans supported the partition of Serbian-inhabited territories, and their genocide in NDH. That is why they executed 50 and 100 Serbian civilians for each German soldier wounded, or killed, respectivelly, without any remorse. Serbs had absolutelly no perspective in an Axis dominated world. That is why no long-term strategic collaboration was ever possible. Scholars agree exactly the opposite of what Peacemaker67 so much insists in. Collaboration only occured because of Partisans, and was sporadic only limited to actions in which both saw strategical advantages in temporarilly focusing in fighting Partisans. It was ridiculous to see the effort of bringing and adding in the articles all existing pictures of any Chetniks posing with some Axis troops, giving the image of some large wide collaboration, but ignoring Mihailovic had his head hunted all time. Not only Chetniks made resistance actions all years from 1941 till 1945, but Chetniks were activelly liberating the country till a point of victory. It is well documented that Tito was supposed to have shared the power, but he didn´t respected the agreement and unilaterally decided to take all power for himself and quickly eliminate Chetniks in what were mass executions and unfair trials. He needed to convince everyone Chetniks collaborated to justify his action of their elimination. Mihailovic and his troops very presence indicates they had clean conscience. Claiming they had only irrelevant resistance actions only in 1941 is an outragious biased view, when we have neutral scholars agreeing vastly in opposite, well documented actions of resistance year-by-year, Mihailovic head hunted by Germans till the end, and Allied high condecorations prasing their resistance efforts. Further denial of their resistance nature is contradicted even by the so obvious beard which was their main characteristic, which was weared because of the commitment not to cut it until the country was not liberated from Axis invasion. Interestingly, editors made an effort not to mention this and ignore their main visual characteristic since it is evidence of their resistance nature. An editor in the discussion at WWII talk-page reminded me of a great point which is that Chetniks even after loosing Allied support, continued being a resistance movement, something any movement which was not resistance in their essence, would not do.
Resumingly, here we have the insistence of denial of Chetniks representivness of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, while in contrast we have the same users mechanically adding the association of Partisans with SFR Yugoslavia, its really selective editing allways trying to make the point that Chetniks didn´t resisted, didn´t represented Yugoslavia, were mostly collaborators, and only Serbian extremist group. FkpCascais ( talk) 23:28, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
I fail to see how my description of the Chetniks is in any way controversial. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 06:13, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for inviting me here, [2] and sorry for replying a bit late, as I was both somewhat busy and doubtful about whether I can contribute to this discussion or not.
While I'm not an expert on this topic, the first thing that strikes me as odd here is that the idea of Chetniks and/or Draža Mihajlović being subordinate to the Yugoslav government in exile is absolute news to me. Moreover, from the communist perspective, wouldn't this be a great argument against the government in exile? By ascribing them effective leadership over the Chetniks, they could have utterly disqualified them as quislings and possibly war criminals. Yet, to my knowledge, such an argument was never made. Maybe - as Peacemaker duly noted - it would not have made sense: if your country is occupied and you are forced to leave, why would you help the occupiers? (Please note the above is a real-world, personal-experience argument, and thus admittedly of little value for Wikipedia.)
This is probably as much as I can contribute to this topic. The real question is: is there actual evidence (in the way of WP:RS) that Chetniks acted on any sort of commands from the Yugoslav government during the Operation Kopaonik? GregorB ( talk) 09:39, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 5 January 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to 7th SS Volunteer Mountain Division Prinz Eugen. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article does not appear to meet WP:NOTABILITY criteria, although some basic content might be merged into the 7th SS Volunteer Mountain Division Prinz Eugen article. The reasons are: 1. it lacks significant coverage except in a primary source (Kumm); 2. the only source for the actual operation is Otto Kumm's Vorwärts Prinz Eugen! Geschichte der 7.SS-Freiwilligen Gebirgs Division „Prinz Eugen”. Kumm was a divisional commander of the 7th SS, and cannot be considered a reliable or secondary source. 3. As far as reliable sources are concerned, a search for Operation Kopaonik on Google Books shows no hits other than self-references to this article- [1]
Any thoughts? Peacemaker67 ( talk) 04:56, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Again, here we have Peacemaker67 denying Chetniks their resistance efforts and representation of Yugoslavia ( diff). Peacemaker67 has insisted troughout time to be linked in any way to Yugoslavia, claiming to be an Australian who is just interested in history. However, such radical stances, tipical to be shared only by Croatian extremists and anti-Serbian movements, make it really irrelevant the origin and reasons for such biased views. We see a continuos insistence by the same user in denial of Chetniks resistance nature in a comment made here. I believe it is time to reexaminate the anti-Chetnik content that has been inserted and kept by force by Peacemaker67 in all articles related to Chetniks. Ultimatelly, the user has managed to eliminate Chetniks from all resistance lists in a sort of argument "they were mainly collaborators, hardly resistance movement, believe me, I have sources, ultimatelly, lets keep them out as controversial anyway". His insistence that Chetniks hardly made resistance activities and sistematically collaborated is the very one which was tryied to be inserted in articles and opposed, giving way to Draza Mihailovic mediation which concluded that description being wrong, and that after presentation of reliable sources, their collaboration was sporadic and oportunistic in nature. Of course there are sources saying they were evil collaborators, as there are sources prasing them as Allied heroes, so there was a need of someone uninvolved seing all sources and analising them by scholar weight, coming to wording that would be the most common and neutral. After 2 years in which it was mostly the side sharing Peacemaker67 view that created all sorts of obstacles including accusations and reporting, the mediators finally came to a conclusion and basically escaped. What happened next is that Peacemaker67 come out of nowhere and claimed neutrality while favoring their side. The mediation conclusions were ignored and they added their POV into the articles by force. After seing apsurds such as claiming that the Legion of Merit award refers only to the episody of airman saved, and not to overal resistance efforts, for me was enough to see that there was no real will to acomplish a balanced text, and alone as I was back then, my efforts were useless.
Further apsurds appear, for instance, in the insistence to deny as much as possible Chetniks relation with Yugoslavia, but present them exclusivelly as Serbian nationalist movement. The participation of other nationalities is ignored and denied. However, understanding the situation from a Serbian perspective is also ignored. One claiming they were Serbian nationalist movement could easily see Chetniks had no motive at all to collaborate. Germans in their Axis dominated world didn´t offer any single advantage to Serbia, or Serbs, rather the opposite. WWI was still present in the mind at that time, and Germans saw WWII in Yugoslavia as way of revenge for all the missfortune WWI has caused to Austria and Germany. Hitler grow-up seing his Austro-Hungarian empire being aniquilated in what was the consequence of what they expected to be an easy and quick victory over small Serbia back then. Serbs were at the very root of the terrible consequences that Allies imposed on Germany and Austria after the war, the very consequences that motivated Hitler to have the policies he had and do what he did. Serbs were ammong Jews and Russians the enemies to destroy. That is why Germans supported the partition of Serbian-inhabited territories, and their genocide in NDH. That is why they executed 50 and 100 Serbian civilians for each German soldier wounded, or killed, respectivelly, without any remorse. Serbs had absolutelly no perspective in an Axis dominated world. That is why no long-term strategic collaboration was ever possible. Scholars agree exactly the opposite of what Peacemaker67 so much insists in. Collaboration only occured because of Partisans, and was sporadic only limited to actions in which both saw strategical advantages in temporarilly focusing in fighting Partisans. It was ridiculous to see the effort of bringing and adding in the articles all existing pictures of any Chetniks posing with some Axis troops, giving the image of some large wide collaboration, but ignoring Mihailovic had his head hunted all time. Not only Chetniks made resistance actions all years from 1941 till 1945, but Chetniks were activelly liberating the country till a point of victory. It is well documented that Tito was supposed to have shared the power, but he didn´t respected the agreement and unilaterally decided to take all power for himself and quickly eliminate Chetniks in what were mass executions and unfair trials. He needed to convince everyone Chetniks collaborated to justify his action of their elimination. Mihailovic and his troops very presence indicates they had clean conscience. Claiming they had only irrelevant resistance actions only in 1941 is an outragious biased view, when we have neutral scholars agreeing vastly in opposite, well documented actions of resistance year-by-year, Mihailovic head hunted by Germans till the end, and Allied high condecorations prasing their resistance efforts. Further denial of their resistance nature is contradicted even by the so obvious beard which was their main characteristic, which was weared because of the commitment not to cut it until the country was not liberated from Axis invasion. Interestingly, editors made an effort not to mention this and ignore their main visual characteristic since it is evidence of their resistance nature. An editor in the discussion at WWII talk-page reminded me of a great point which is that Chetniks even after loosing Allied support, continued being a resistance movement, something any movement which was not resistance in their essence, would not do.
Resumingly, here we have the insistence of denial of Chetniks representivness of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, while in contrast we have the same users mechanically adding the association of Partisans with SFR Yugoslavia, its really selective editing allways trying to make the point that Chetniks didn´t resisted, didn´t represented Yugoslavia, were mostly collaborators, and only Serbian extremist group. FkpCascais ( talk) 23:28, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
I fail to see how my description of the Chetniks is in any way controversial. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 06:13, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for inviting me here, [2] and sorry for replying a bit late, as I was both somewhat busy and doubtful about whether I can contribute to this discussion or not.
While I'm not an expert on this topic, the first thing that strikes me as odd here is that the idea of Chetniks and/or Draža Mihajlović being subordinate to the Yugoslav government in exile is absolute news to me. Moreover, from the communist perspective, wouldn't this be a great argument against the government in exile? By ascribing them effective leadership over the Chetniks, they could have utterly disqualified them as quislings and possibly war criminals. Yet, to my knowledge, such an argument was never made. Maybe - as Peacemaker duly noted - it would not have made sense: if your country is occupied and you are forced to leave, why would you help the occupiers? (Please note the above is a real-world, personal-experience argument, and thus admittedly of little value for Wikipedia.)
This is probably as much as I can contribute to this topic. The real question is: is there actual evidence (in the way of WP:RS) that Chetniks acted on any sort of commands from the Yugoslav government during the Operation Kopaonik? GregorB ( talk) 09:39, 14 September 2019 (UTC)