Talk:Tuzla

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon Tuzla is part of the WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Bosnia and Herzegovina on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

What happened to the history section ?! Does someone have a problem with facts from Tuzla's recent history ? If so, please comment, but DO NOT delete an entire section. The history section was brief, but accurate and based on undisputed facts.

And what on earth is this 2007 census estimate ? Any sources ? Or is it just a lucky guess made by someone who doesn't even live in our city?

Anyway, I'll return the history bit and change one word in it for the sake of accuracy. Wereeven 00:12, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


Disputed attack on Tuzla airport during Kosovo war[edit]

In response to the editor who "knows" that 61 NATO planes were shot down during the Kosovo war, here is an article by USA Today which does indeed hail a significant military achievement of the Serbian air defenses, shooting down a stealth fighter. It was one of two fighters shot down. http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-10-26-serb-stealth_x.htm

I don't see why would that source be more reliable having in mind it's a US website and US were one side in the war, ofcourse they won't acknowledge that they had heavy losses against much inferior enemy and it's not the first time they do it. I can give links to serbian webpages/news agencies that say the opposite story, why would they be less reliable? For example: http://members.fortunecity.com/serbia/doc/nato-gz.htm (Source: Yugoslavian Army, 4/28/1999.6/15/1999.). I also edited the title of the discussion to make it NPOV. 195.252.92.147 16:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

What is wrong with you? This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a playground. No such attack occurred, ever. Unlike you we were there, but you still claim this happened, for God's sake how could you know better than us? There was only one incursion into Bosnian airspace during the Kosovo war, and both Serbian planes involved were shot down miles away from Tuzla. The incident is well documented, unlike your claims, so please stop making these ridiculous changes. No such event took place, thus there is now way on Earth you can prove it did. Wereeven 17:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

195.252.92.147, there were representatives from many countries with personel at Eagle Base in 1999, from the European Union, from throughout the world. Find one official statement from any of those countries that your alleged attack took place? By the way, the websites you refer to are NOT official websites of the current government of Serbia. Furthermore, the dates you give for your sources are from 1999 when Slobodan Milosevic was in power. It is not a matter of our word against yours. But if it were, you have exposed yourself as someone whose word is worthless. So your word is not going to count much of anything against anyone else or standing on its own. You live in a Milosevic-ear fantasy world. Your fallacious claims will not hold up to scrutiny. End of story.

Power Plant and Photograph Therof[edit]

I'm a new editor, so I'm reluctant to make changes to established articles. However, when entering Tuzla I was immediatly struck by the enourmous power plant, and it seemed to me like it must have been important to the local economy and regional interests. There also seem to be several internet articles about possible environmental concerns and the European Bank for Reconstruction's financing an upgrade and repairs in 2001. I was wondering if this bears mentioning in the article? I took several pictures that I think meet wiki's quality standars, and would be happy to let them be used if an edit would be considered useful. JovanPanić 13:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's important for the local and regional economy, as it is fueled by coal dug up in several mines around Tuzla. I'm not sure about the environmental stuff, but to my knowledge the plant was extensively upgraded in recent years and its oldest 32MW generators and boilers, dating back to 1961, were permanently taken off line. The installed power with the old generators was 799MW, so now it's around 735MW, but there are plans to expand the plants capacity by 350MW. It employs several hundred people, and the coal mines employ thousands, so yes, it should be mentioned... Wereeven 20:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Removal of the claim about "Attack on JNA, Tuzla"[edit]

I removed following from "history" section: "It was the place of the attack on non-armed forces of JNA, which were mainly Serb soldiers, who were withdrawing from the city. According to the official indictment, around 200 Serbian soldiers and their commanders were killed and more than 140 were arrested and tortured[1]." The reason for removal was that the claim tend to be very one-sided, and the source not specially reliable. This event ("Attack on JNA, Tuzla")is still widely disputed, and I don't believe that this typical "choosing side" should be the norm for Wikipedia. Aditionally the source to which it has been refered in the article is more than problematic. This souce is the internet-portal of "Blic", a newspaper which is well-known for it's ultra-nationalist policy. If we are to uphold the standard of articles on Tuzla and Balkan during 1990's we should not uncritically refer to any newspaper, since the media was undubtebly one of the prime reasons for the war in Yugoslavia. Rather we should refer to books written by experts (historians, anthropologist etc). And since such sources for "Attack on JNA, Tuzla" are not available yet, we should rather leave the subject to be analysed by the experts than "choose" the version we like best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Z.j.medo (talkcontribs) 19:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Based on your username, I don't think you're neutral. Attack on JNA is widely known and there are even several videos from the event (among others, Tuzla television transmitted the attack live at the time). I.e. this event is object of no public dispute - only numbers of victims might be.

I find it however interesting that you weren't bothered by the claim that Serbian artillery killed 71 civilians, which is with no reference whatsoever, and which is an event disputable in public (disputable concerning whether Serbs really bombed the site or other sides did). But this widely known fact about attack on JNA wasn't referenced enough for you, although "Blic" is a newspaper with great reputation in that part of Balkan. I think you shouldn't have removed a referenced part of the article until you prove its irrelevance or POV. --Ml01172 (talk) 00:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Based on the article history page, I can also see you've been vandalizing this article several times, so I think one should revert your changes. I shall leave that to an administrator, however, if there is one available. --Ml01172 (talk) 00:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


I have been "vandalizing" the article because I am a new member, so I had problems with finding out how to write my comment. I am sorry for "vandalizing". It really wasn't my intention.

I never said that I am neutral. No one is! So my name doesn't mean anything. But still "Blic" is far, far from reliable source. Tuzla become more nationalistic after the war in Bosnia broke out, that is for sure. But still the claim that soldiers were tortured after May 15th 1992 is far from being "the fact". The number of killed soldiers also tend to be exaggerated, or at least can easily be disputed, which is not the case with 71 killed on May 25th 1995. These are the facts we know by now. And that is why I removed one claim and not the other.

To try to be more objective, but not neutral (because my professional and personal opinion certainly influence my world-view), I will write a comment on this event in the article. I hope that that will be acceptable for You and other Wikipedia users. Zoran Jovanovic Medo

Yes, NPOV is definitely the best way. I for myself agree with the current state, in lack of more data. --194.247.215.250 (talk) 19:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

So for how long are we going to wait for the notorious fact concerning the 1992 killings of the JNA soldiers to be included in the article? Eluding this crime from the Tuzla entry doesn't serve the validity of the Wikipedia and will by no means contribute to the multicultural fairy tale about the town. A shame for the editors and the insult for the relatives of the murdered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agorapromo (talkcontribs) 23:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

In the meantime I took action and added the simple basics of the event concerning the 1992 Tuzla JNA column incident. It is the article that already exists on Wikipedia, though this matter certainly needs further clarifications in the days to come. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agorapromo (talkcontribs) 00:43, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Danish efford to protect the population[edit]

On the danish Wiki you can find an article: da:Lars Møller (officer) about a danish officer who in 1994 bacame famous for his service. He was chief for a tank-unit under UN-command. Under a gunfire April, 29 1994, he fired against a bosnian-serbian unit trying to attack Tuzla. That was the first operation, where UN had used heavy weapons.

I belive that it would be a good idea to mention that somewhere in the english Wiki, so maybe someone could veryfy the information and whrite aboute it in english? (da:Bruger:MGA73) --87.59.135.203 (talk) 19:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

So far, the article has two normal-size sections: History and Contemporary Tuzla (which, BTW, contains everything but history). I think it would be more useful to add to the Contemporary section, than to add marginally notable events to History section. After all, Tuzla was not invented in the early 1990s and the article should not present such a view (which it already does). Admiral Norton (talk) 20:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Tuzla[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Tuzla's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "B92":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 02:56, 26 November 2009 (UTC)