Talk:Operation Deny Flight

message: This is particularly directed at anyone leaving peer review feedback.  In the infobox for the article, I've done my best to fit the article's content to the categories in the box, but there was some trouble.  Obviously, the date and location are not a problem, but in terms of Belligerents and Commanders, the reality is more complex.  This was not a simple two-sided conflict.  One side was clearly NATO led by Leighton Smith, but UNPROFOR could at times be included with NATO.  The other side is vastly more complex.  NATO was attempting to stop anyone from flying in the airspace, so technically if a Argentinian aircraft had entered Bosnian air space, it would have been intercepted by NATO fighters.  More realistically, though, NATO was trying to stop flights by Republika Srpska, Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia itself,  the Republic of Serbia Krajina, and the Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  At some times it is appropriate to lump some of these groups together, but at any time, there were several sides in the conflict, and I don't know how to reflect that in an infobox.
While the no-fly zone had many targets, the CAS and air strikes under Deny Flight were aimed more or less exclusively at the Bosnian Serbs / Republika Srpska and the Krajina Serbs, but as you know if you know much about this conflict, even those are blurry categories.  So, at the moment I've just left the infobox depicting this as NATO vs. Bosnian Serbs.  Thoughts on alternate ways of doing? Cool3 (talk) 23:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: I have edited the first several paragraphs of this article.  One thing I noticed in the style of the article is the use of passive voice in sentences and phrases such as 'Air strikes were done by the US' rather than 'The US commenced air strikes'.  It isn't rampant to the point that it distracts the reader, but it is there to the point that it lengthens the phrasing so that it is not as direct as it could be.  I noticed that cool3 seems to be the primary author of the article (nice job) so if you want to tighten this up, that is one place you can look.  I will do more as I have time (usually on breaks at work - I'm a professional technical writer by the way) but as I go over it, I need cool to re-read my edits to make sure that I haven't edited necessary facts out of the article (or anything else you wanted to keep.)
Cheers J appleseed2 (talk) 20:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the edits!  Just as a note of caution, sometimes the passive voice is used because there is no alternative and a change to the active voice would introduce factual inaccuracies/POV.  What you've done so far looks great though. Cool3 (talk) 21:38, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit pass of this article 

message: This link: Kosovo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_War  is like ghost, and it appears on a very begin of article. Please, if someone is able to remove it--Palapa (talk) 23:19, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ghost link 

message: The links to the AFSOUTH Fact Sheet under Web Resources are broken. The documents have been removed. I tried to find the document elsewhere, but I could not locate another copy. Please update link statuses to dead or provide another good link for the Fact Sheet.
The broken links are listed as:
"Operation Deny Flight". AFSOUTH Fact Sheets. NATO Regional Headquarters Allied Forces Southern Europe. Retrieved 2011-04-17.
"AFSOUTH Fact sheets: Operation Deny Flight". Regional Headquarters Allied Forces Southern Europe. Allied Joint Force Command Naples. 18 July 2003. Retrieved 2011-04-17.
Pastafarian23 (talk) 17:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFSOUTH Fact Sheet links dead