Talk:Yugoslav People's Army

message: Why there is almost nothing about the cruel war crimes of the JNA??? Unbelieveable! And there was no confusion, it was clear that they kill everybody who is not serbian. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.75.195.55 (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right on. Move this page to "Serbian National Army", I believe they even killed dogs, cats and house pets, they knocked down trees and destroyed all organic life form for not being "of Serbian origin". This page is about the JNA, its creation up to its dissolution in 1992. The high profile atrocities happened mostly after this time, and were carried out by different people, in different places and against different people. Meanwhile, if you have any sources linking war crimes to the JNA, you don't have to ask me why I didn't display them, you are free to edit the article yourself. Balkantropolis 07:06, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  War crimes 

message: I see nothing but facts in the article. Isn't it time to remove the NPOV tag? btw, the statistics above should be included, but if we cannot reach consensus, I don't insist.--Bora Nesic 00:06, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Tag 

message: Isn't the concept of total national defence similar to the Swiss Army? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.203.200.2 (talk • contribs) 16:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swiss Army 

message: All sources I've seen so far mention only 300 aircraft. The figure of 700 seems much too high. The proportion I've read about is basically: about 130 MiG-21s, 20 MiG-29s (which goes along with the article) and the rest local craft.
The figure of 300 probbably includes only combat aircraft, but 700 is still way off the mark. It is possible it includes all training, transport and recon craft. There were almost certainly no "700 combat aircraft". Right?
The Spanish Inquisitor 12:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My figures haven't been updated in a while Equipment of YAF but nothing was thrown out in Yugoslav Armed Forces so number of combat aircraft (tanks, guns etc.) were massively inflated since totally obsolete aircraft were listed as combat/light attack when they were no longer even fit for training service. Size of YAF post WW2 is also huge but most of the aircraft were piston engine when most of the World moved to jet aircraft. --Ivan Bajlo 12:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, so it's more then 300 but not by that much. I will just remove the word "combat" where 700 are mentioned, since it's probbably about half of that, until we can find a better source. Thanx.The Spanish Inquisitor 13:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aircraft number seems dubious - 700? 

message: Went ahead and created a new (separate) page for Ground Forces, as this would bring article(s) organization into line with actual JNA organization. As the Air Force (RV i PVO) and Navy (JRV) already have separate pages/articles it would be normal to have an article for the largest of the JNA services, KoV.
Also, went ahead and cleaned-up the headings in this article, with proper linking to the new Ground Forces article. Gaston200 (talk) 12:35, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Separate page for KoV, i.e. Ground Forces

message: this section is clearly biased and evrything but NPOV.--Severino (talk) 12:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The section needs clear expansion and much work. It is limited by the mention of facts. Anyway, what you mean by "common sense"?  I made a minor edit where I hope I solved the TO question. Just as note, it was my first edit ever on that section. FkpCascais (talk) 07:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dissolution 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:36, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Sokogaleb.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: An image used in this article, File:VPBR-34 Pula.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:VPBR-34 Pula.JPG)
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:VPBR-34 Pula.JPG Nominated for Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:50, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:P-832 Drava.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: In Serbo-Croatian (or Croato-Serbian), word "narod" means both the "people" and the "nation". So, in case of Yugoslav People's Army, correct translations of "Jugoslovenska narodna armija" are both Yugoslav People's Army and Yugoslav National Army. In materials of US DoD, JNA is translated in both ways.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.149.232.157 (talk) 18:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yugoslav People's Army or Yugoslav National Army 

message: It is important when talking about active and reserve personnel number first to have actual year for that number. YPA active personnel varied from about 800.000 immediately after end of WWII and late 1940's to less then 200.000 thousand in beginning of 1990's. Given number can not be bigger then YPA had units according to their own plans where that personnel would have some job or function as part of military, so numbers must be tied with actual formations - army's, corps, divisions, brigades etc. It can not be given random numbers we like but actual maximum that units could hold at some time in total or had during their existence within actual year. Reserve for active troops is about number active troops could receive into existing units according to mobilizations plans. Each branch of Yugoslavia armed forces had its own mobilization plans to form units or to replace combat losses. Reserve could be active(usually tied for some active formations with low numbers of personnel but called often for trainings or to be used) or passive(as pool for drafting in order to replace combat losses and other different purposes). Passive reserve sometimes could be also given as total number of all personnel that had some military training that are decommissioned after receiving such training and numbers also vary by year so we need to be clear about what year we are talking about and for what units or branch of armed forces is that reserve as it can not be  same number for all branches. In case of Yugoslavia reserve for both branch of armed forces - YPA and TO are different things and reserve for one branch was tied only for that branch trough mobilization plans and should be given separately or total numbers would be inaccurate and doubled.  Loesorion (talk) 23:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Active and reserve personnel number of YPA 

message: I just removed the copyedit tag after a huge edit. However, now the multiple issues tag only has one issue. Easy fix, right? But the refimprove tag was added in April 2008. I could just make it one tag, but then it would look like it was added recently. Should I just do that?
Asparagusus (interaction) 13:56, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed copyedit tag 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Arny of Yugoslavia and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Joy (talk) 13:05, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Arny of Yugoslavia" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]