Talk:Battle of Zadar

message: :Image:UCK NLA.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 11:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:UCK NLA.jpg

message: There is no any dispute about POV initiated. 
The POV mark was inserted even withoud any other comment.  According the previous actions of the IP address 68.60.153.73 I would guess that he was not satisfied with quality or usage of  this reference, but he was unable to remove it  or to improve it or indicate what actually should have been wrong according to his view. That is merely my gues, but I do not see any other way to find the objections against objectivity in the article, except taht there will anyone else find the flaw (in the usage of the reference?) and report it here. So I do propose to remove the POV tag by anyone if no objection will appear on the talk page, lets say within month. Reo ON  |  +++ 11:06, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV ? lets remove the tag (possibly) 

message: Even this Serbian site verifies it:
http://www.avijacijabezgranica.com/jrvudesi.html
I'll edit that false statement (that only one plane was shot) on all wikipedia pages mention it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by AurgelmirCro (talk • contribs) 06:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  There were two planes shot down, not one in "both of them" situation. 

message: It is true, that Zadar and Sibenik were not captured by the serbs, but Kijevo, Skabrnja, Benkovac, Obrovac, Zemunik, Malesnica, Drnis, Vrlika and the Peruca dam were occupied and captured by the serbs, in and directly before this serbian military operation in 1991. So clear is that, the croats lost a lot of cities, villages and territory, while the serbs did not loose anything in this operation. So it is stupid to say, that this is a croatian victory, because the croats got nothing they only lost!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.152.252.146 (talk) 21:29, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Independently I came to the same conclusion. The Serbian side failed to achieve their strategic objective, while the Croatian side did, but overall it was not a terrific success for anyone. On the scale of the war, the Croatian successes in this operation were significant, but on the scale of the battle they weren't. The infobox is now updated to say it was a stalemate and what each side achieved. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

text: This is 1993 and onwards, which is two years after this operation anyway, so I've put the details in the Peruća Dam article. I did note here that the failure to bring down the dam still put it out of operation. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 11:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Croatian Victory ???