Talk:Organization of Yugoslav Nationalists/GA1: Difference between revisions

Line 33: Line 33:

* The following statements need a citation. I know that you have citations in the following sentences, but given the gravity of the particular statements it advisable to reinforce them with citations.

* The following statements need a citation. I know that you have citations in the following sentences, but given the gravity of the particular statements it advisable to reinforce them with citations.

** {{xt|The German-speaking minority was also targeted in Slovenia. The attacks included bombing newspaper offices, assaults on social events organised by the minority, and public protests against the Germans involving ransacking German-owned homes.}}

** {{xt|The German-speaking minority was also targeted in Slovenia. The attacks included bombing newspaper offices, assaults on social events organised by the minority, and public protests against the Germans involving ransacking German-owned homes.}}

*** Do you mean citation or quotation? In this case, the Đorđević, p.195 reference covers the sentence, and I’ll repeat it to make it clear it covers the particular sentence. If quotation is needed, I can provide it as well, although I believe it to be unnecessary. The relevant passage goes as follows (transliterated from Cyrilic script): “U Sloveniji je na meti bila nemačka manjina, ali su se dešavali sukobi i sa klerikalcima. Početkom februara izvršen je upad na zabavu pangermanskog Lovačkog društva u Celju. Posle toga, po gradu su priređivane antinemačke demonstracije prilikom kojih je došlo do uličnih sukoba, kada je demolirano više od 200 nemačkih kuća i lokala, dok je u redakciju lista Ciler cajtung bačena bomba. Sredinom februara demolirana je štamparija glasila pučke stranke u Mariboru, a u martu je došlo do sukoba sa klerikalcima u Slovenskoj Bistrici. Na samim izborima orjunaši su sačekivali Nemce i izbacivali ih sa biračkih mesta.” (My translation: In Slovenia, German minority was targeted, but there were also clashes with the clericalists (reference to the Slovene People’s Party supporters). In early February, they stormed a party organised by the Pan-Germanic Hunting Association in Celje. After that, anto-German protests were organised in the city and some street clashes occurred during the protests, resulting in ransacking of more than 200 German-owned homes and businesses and a bomb was thorwn into the office of the Ciler cajtung newspaper. In mid-February, the (Slovene) People’s Party in Maribor was ransacked and there was a clash with the clericalists in Slovenska Bistrica in March. During the elections, the Orjuna members waited for Germans to arrive to polling stations and then threw them out of the polling stations.)”

** {{xt|Namely, in the province, ORJUNA targeted Germans, Hungarians, and Hungarian-speaking Jews as foreign elements threatening the state.}}

** {{xt|Namely, in the province, ORJUNA targeted Germans, Hungarians, and Hungarian-speaking Jews as foreign elements threatening the state.}}

* {{xt|One of ORJUNA’s final large actions took place in May 1928, […], and additional protests happened in Šibenik, Split, Dubrovnik, Ljubljana, Skopje, Sarajevo, and Zagreb.}} I think you need to briefly expand this. Did these protests lasted a single day? Did they take place simultaneously? How did they lasted? How extensively was the damage, if any? Given that this was the last major action of the group a better description might help, if of course this can be supported by the sources.

* {{xt|One of ORJUNA’s final large actions took place in May 1928, […], and additional protests happened in Šibenik, Split, Dubrovnik, Ljubljana, Skopje, Sarajevo, and Zagreb.}} I think you need to briefly expand this. Did these protests lasted a single day? Did they take place simultaneously? How did they lasted? How extensively was the damage, if any? Given that this was the last major action of the group a better description might help, if of course this can be supported by the sources.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 08:41, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: A.Cython (talk · contribs) 02:03, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will review the article but I need a couple of weeks to go through the article before providing comments.A.Cython (talk) 02:03, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking up the review. Fortunately, the two-week wait suits me perfectly, because I’m short of editing time right now — but I expect to have much more time in about two weeks! Cheers Tomobe03 (talk) 09:28, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First reading impressions. Overall, it is an interesting article and I think it was great potential. However, the prose requires some work to streamline the narrative by making it more clear who is who and the why and whats. Part of the problem is that there are a lot of player groups resulting in a lot of acronyms making it very difficult to follow the narrative. I also think that there are some missed opportunities to add relevant context that could help better understanding the motivations of these groups. It would also help by having more explicit summaries of the activities of the groups. Below, I include a list of specific comments.

• Add wikilinks at the lead on the following:
• The Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (later renamed Yugoslavia) was proclaimed by the Prince Regent Alexander on 1 December 1918. When and where. Was it not that Serbia was defeated in WWI? Was this proclamation right after its liberation by also taking territories that belonged to Austro-Hungarian Empire? If so a brief context should be added since this very important event.
• Maybe I failed to read it carefully, but I feel that you need to explain a little better what “integral Yugoslavism” means. You do not want the reader to go to another page to figure out the basic definition. I am saying this because the first context that I got was proponents of integral Yugoslavism considered advocates of a federal system of government separatists.
  • There is a brief explanation in the second paragraph of the “Origins” section where Yugoslavism is also linked. It is possible to add more detail, but I felt that this brief introduction was sufficient for casual readers and the link would serve those who want more info. (T)
• You do not need to define (acronymised as ORJUNA) twice, one time is enough.
• If you are not going to use the acronyms JNNO, SLS, and SDS, then remove them. The article already has a lot of acronyms for a reader to keep track, so anything that is not used remove it to help him/her to read your article.
  • Yugoslav Muslim Organization (JMO). This included armed clashes with JMO supporters you could rewrite this in a way to get rid of the JMO acronym as well, since it is only used once.
    • Removed the acronyms used only once (JNNO, SLS, SDS) and rewritten as suggested not to require use of the JMO acronym. (T)
• Is (akciona sekcija, plural akcione sekcije) used in the article in a meaningful way? If not then remove it. It distracts the reader from the main narrative.
  • Moved to an existing note on the unit (T)
• The following statements need a citation. I know that you have citations in the following sentences, but given the gravity of the particular statements it advisable to reinforce them with citations.
  • The German-speaking minority was also targeted in Slovenia. The attacks included bombing newspaper offices, assaults on social events organised by the minority, and public protests against the Germans involving ransacking German-owned homes.
    • Do you mean citation or quotation? In this case, the Đorđević, p.195 reference covers the sentence, and I’ll repeat it to make it clear it covers the particular sentence. If quotation is needed, I can provide it as well, although I believe it to be unnecessary. The relevant passage goes as follows (transliterated from Cyrilic script): “U Sloveniji je na meti bila nemačka manjina, ali su se dešavali sukobi i sa klerikalcima. Početkom februara izvršen je upad na zabavu pangermanskog Lovačkog društva u Celju. Posle toga, po gradu su priređivane antinemačke demonstracije prilikom kojih je došlo do uličnih sukoba, kada je demolirano više od 200 nemačkih kuća i lokala, dok je u redakciju lista Ciler cajtung bačena bomba. Sredinom februara demolirana je štamparija glasila pučke stranke u Mariboru, a u martu je došlo do sukoba sa klerikalcima u Slovenskoj Bistrici. Na samim izborima orjunaši su sačekivali Nemce i izbacivali ih sa biračkih mesta.” (My translation: In Slovenia, German minority was targeted, but there were also clashes with the clericalists (reference to the Slovene People’s Party supporters). In early February, they stormed a party organised by the Pan-Germanic Hunting Association in Celje. After that, anto-German protests were organised in the city and some street clashes occurred during the protests, resulting in ransacking of more than 200 German-owned homes and businesses and a bomb was thorwn into the office of the Ciler cajtung newspaper. In mid-February, the (Slovene) People’s Party in Maribor was ransacked and there was a clash with the clericalists in Slovenska Bistrica in March. During the elections, the Orjuna members waited for Germans to arrive to polling stations and then threw them out of the polling stations.)”
  • Namely, in the province, ORJUNA targeted Germans, Hungarians, and Hungarian-speaking Jews as foreign elements threatening the state.
• One of ORJUNA’s final large actions took place in May 1928, […], and additional protests happened in Šibenik, Split, Dubrovnik, Ljubljana, Skopje, Sarajevo, and Zagreb. I think you need to briefly expand this. Did these protests lasted a single day? Did they take place simultaneously? How did they lasted? How extensively was the damage, if any? Given that this was the last major action of the group a better description might help, if of course this can be supported by the sources.
  • ORJUNA peaked in 1925, and its power gradually declined afterwards. It is not clear what you mean “peaked”. You need to be a little more explicit in the summary of how the particular group was influential. Otherwise, it is difficult to understand how its power (whatever it was) “gradually declined”.
• In the process, those commentators equated the Yugoslavist ideology and the Greater Serbian political project. Please elaborate as this is a convoluted statement.
• In some sources, the Action Groups are referred to as the Action Troops. Rewrite by removing the WP:WEASEL word, i.e., some, by being more explicit. It is confusing, is the supported reference actually say that “some sources say…” or this is an example of a source that uses the term “Action Troops”?
  • This is an example of such a source. I have rephrased the sentence accordingly. (T)
• its main publication since you are not mentioning other publications, then the word “main” is not needed.
• A split in the leadership occurred in […] the head of the Split district, accusing… added emphasis. To help the reader, it is better to avoid using words with double meaning. You can say ‘A divided leadership…’.
  • Rephrased. Good catch (T)
• The attempt failed due to a lack of interest. by whom? The public, politicians or anyone else?
• ORJUNA did not target every ethnic minority. The Slovaks were deemed loyal to the state and therefore not attacked. Were there any other such minorities? If yes name them. If not simplify by saying ‘ORJUNA did not target Slovaks, because …’

I need a few more days to go through the figures and the rest of references, but you have some comments to work with. After this I will prepare the evaluation. A.Cython (talk) 05:28, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The figures look ok. As for references, I must say I do not read Serbian or Croatian, but there are sufficient sources in English to go through the review, which some are not in the article. Given that an important aspect in WP is verifiability, the inclusion of additional English sources is necessary. From my search the following sources could potentially be added (even if it is only for “further reading” section).

1. Bakić, Dragan; Fundić, Dušan; Lompar, Rastko, eds. (2023). Right-wing Politics in Interwar Southeastern Europe : Between Conservatism and Fascism. Institute for Balkan Studies, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts. ISBN 9788671791236.
2. Dragosavljević, Vasilije (2015). “Influences of Italian fascism on ideology and political practice of the Organization of Yugoslav Nationalists (ORJUNA)”. In Biagini, Antonello; Vučetić, Biljana; Rudić, Srđan (eds.). Serbian-Italian Relations: History and Modern Times. The Institute of History Belgrade. ISBN 9788677431099.
3. Djuraskovic, S. (2007). The Organisation of the Yugoslav Nationalists-ORJUNA, 1921-1929 (PDF) (Thesis). Central European University.
4. Dragosavljević, V. (2019). “Irredentist Actions of the Slovenian Organisation of Yugoslav Nationalists (the ORJUNA) in Italy and Austria (1922–1930)”. Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino (before 1960: Prispevki za zgodovino delavskega gibanja). 59 (3): 31–52.

Below I include the status of the review so far.

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Overall, it is well written, though there are some issues on easing the reading flow that need to be addressed.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   So far from the articles in English and the extra mentioned above, the article is ok. No copyright violations based on Earwig’s tool. However, inclusion of more English-based sources for verifiability purposes is needed to complete evaluation.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Focused and covers different aspects

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   It appears that has neutral language.

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 non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I will keep it open for the next couple of weeks, starting today. Extension is possible provided improvements are initiated. A.Cython (talk) 01:46, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]