Talk:13 April 1999 Albania–Yugoslav border incident

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

38 soldiers killed?[edit]

Even if we take into account report from the Independent without actual proofs don't you think 38 killed paratroopers is huge? Paratroopers were conducting raids to prevent/cut and/or deny KLA further incursions, mobilizing and attacks over Yugoslav border. Generally speaking this was commando raid which was very successful since it caught enemy by surprise. Stories of tanks and MLRS fire and dozens of Yugoslav casualties are for NPOV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.110.250.10 (talk) 12:44, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

No because the Yugoslav army hasn't had even the ability to solve militairy problems within their borders --Vinie007 07:51, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
I agree, besides the sources provided never mention that 38 soldiers on either side were killed. One article quotes an Albanian commander as saying that "many" Yugoslav soldiers were killed, but he never provides a specific number.

23_editor 11:24, 19 May 2012

Neutrality and verifiability[edit]

The source talks about "Serbian positions", "Serbian soldiers", "Serbian shells", "Serbian civilians" &c. I am saddened to see somebody editing [[Military of Serbia and Montenegro]] into a piped link to bolster the argument that it was a Yugoslav thing. bobrayner (talk) 14:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

News web sites which are extensively used as sources in this article frequently use non-encyclopedic terms (colloquialisms?). Referring to Yugoslav positions/soldiers/shells as Serb is similar to describing Soviet soldiers as Russians or Ottoman forces as Turks. I am not familiar with this event and this comment is only my honest opinion about news websites referring to Yugoslav xyz as to Serb xyz.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:11, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Informative title?[edit]

I came across this article by accident and hope it still has a few watchers. Is the title informative? If no clear title for the incident has evolved, would at least adding the year of the incident to the title make sense? Or possibly merge with the war article?Pincrete (talk) 15:34, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm not too concerned about the article's title, if you can come up with a better title, I'll be willing to see what you've got mate. I'm not sure the year is necessary as we aren't disambiguating it. IJA (talk) 15:38, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh and thanks for your recent edits too. IJA (talk) 15:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
User:23 editor, whilst I understand the need for greater clarity in the title, I wonder whether this is a good choice. Albania–Yugoslav border incident, April 1999 would seem to be better (what/where before when and omit 13th). Pincrete (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
@Pincrete: Yes, but there were other border incidents in April 1999, notably 8 KLA militants killed and 7 wounded after walking into a VJ ambush on 9 April, intense Serb shelling which left 2–3 dead and 9 wounded on 11 April and the 18 April incident where 5 Kosovo Albanian refugees (including 3 children) were killed after their vehicle crossed a landmine. The first incident is probably notable enough for a stand-alone article, the others not so much, but I'm open to discussion. 23 editor (talk) 21:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
I wondered about that, would it still not be better as where-what/when ? I dont know about guidelines, but it seems more natural. The towns are probably not sufficiently known or close enough to define the incident. … … ps I'm floating the question, but happy to leave decision with you. Pincrete (talk) 21:29, 20 September 2015 (UTC)