Talk:Yugoslavism/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Vacant0 (talk · contribs) 18:54, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Tomobe03! I'll be reviewing this and the other two articles due to the ongoing GAN backlog. I will start the review a bit later. Cheers, --Vacant0 (talk) 18:54, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Comments

General

• Since efn templates have been applied to Yugoslavism and Yugoslavdom, I would recommend adding it for Yugoslav nationalism too → {{efn|{{lang-sr|југословенски национализам}} / {{lang-sr|jugoslovenski nacionalizam}}; {{lang-hr|jugoslavenski nacionalizam}}; {{lang-sl|jugoslovanski nacionalizem}}; {{lang-mk|југословенски национализам}}}}
• Lede is well-written, it satisfies the manual of style.
• "By 1910, they rallied around the People's Party (PS) but accounted..." – Isn't the abbreviation supposed to be NS for Narodna Stranka?
• "This also produced nationalist claims Serbs were..." → This also produced nationalist claims that Serbs were...
• Link intelligentsia.
• Narodno jedinstvo translates to "National Unity", although I'm not sure if the source mentions it as "Oneness".
  • This issue has already been raised on the article talk page in October. To sum up, this particular concept in interwar Yugoslav context is specifically referred to as the national oneness in contemporary and modern English language sources. Sources to this are provided at talk. (T)
    • Alright, thanks. --Vacant0 (talk) 16:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
• "This started changed in late 1912 with the outbreak of the First Balkan War." – remove started.
• "The fault lay primarily..." → The fault laid primarily...
• Montenegrin Orthodox Church should be unlinked since the article refers to the present canonically unrecognized church.
  • Should it perhaps be linked to Montenegrin Orthodox Church? (T)
    • Yes, that's the correct link. --Vacant0 (talk) 16:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
• Slovenian DEMOS was centre-right → "The Slovene centre-right DEMOS coalition".
  • Not sure I can find this one? DEMOS is mentioned only once in: "Slovene non-communist DEMOS coalition, which won the 1990 Slovene parliamentary elections, supported those views." (T)
    • "In April 1990 the elections to the republican assembly produced a majority for Democratic Opposition in Slovenia (DEMOS), a coalition of six centre-right parties." – mentioned in the R.J. Crampton 2002 source, it isn't in the page but it can be added.
      • Sure, reads better than before. (T)
• Is there a source that claims SDP as communist during 1990?
• "In 1988–1994, Yugoslavist ideas proposed by Serb intellectuals, but they were abandoned as unfeasible." – is "but they" a typo?

Images

• File:SHS slavlje 19189.jpg – I don't think that the license is correct in this case, and is "Dom I svijet" an author?
• File:SHS 1918 adresa Aleksandru.jpg – per above.
  • Correct. Dom i svijet is the newspaper which ran the image. I have replaced the author field with "unknown" for now as there appears to be no informatioin about authorship. It would be reasonable to assume the newspaper had its photographer in the square/sent with the delegation.
• Rest of images are alright.

Sources

• All are alright.

On hold until this gets fixed. --Vacant0 (talk) 14:55, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for taking this up. I think I have dealt with all of the above through remarks above and/or edits to the article now. Could you please review and reassess? --Tomobe03 (talk) 16:42, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Oops. Missed SDP comment. Let me get back to you on that one.--Tomobe03 (talk) 16:44, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Fixed, no there would ne no source SDP was communist in 1990. Fixed accordingly - good catch.--Tomobe03 (talk) 16:49, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Everything is alright now, thanks for fixing these issues. I'm promoting this article to GA, and I hope this article gets nominated for FA – I like it. Also, Happy New Year. --Vacant0 (talk) 17:39, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Likewise Happy New Year to you Vacant0. --Tomobe03 (talk) 19:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)