Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Croatia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Croatia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CroatiaWikipedia:WikiProject CroatiaTemplate:WikiProject CroatiaCroatia
Franjo Tuđman is within the scope of WikiProject Yugoslavia, a collaborative effort to improve the Misplaced Pages coverage of articles related to Yugoslavia and its nations. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.YugoslaviaWikipedia:WikiProject YugoslaviaTemplate:WikiProject YugoslaviaYugoslavia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Text and/or other creative content from Vrhovnik was copied or moved into Franjo Tuđman with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.
Vrhovnik was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 16 January 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Franjo Tuđman. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Franjo Tuđman article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Why does the lead section contain a ICTY verdict, as if that is the thing he will be remebered in history?
Furthermore, it is written in some kind of broken English.
Why does it not instead emphasise the importance of this individual in Croatia's independence, and in leading his nation through war?
Joint criminal enterprise
Please remove the passage starting with "In May 2013, the ICTY, found that Tuđman had been the leader of the joint criminal enterprise" as this was found not to be true (speaking about icty finding). The appeals chamber had found that “he Trial Chamber made no explicit findings concerning participation in the JCE and did not find them guilty of any crimes" . If not removed, new content should be added by reporting what the appeals chamber had found. I'm pinging all participants of the upper discussion. @Peacemaker67: @GregorB: @Tzowu: @Comatmebro: @Rms125a@hotmail.com: @Cwobeel: @Zezen: @Aircorn: @Jack Upland: @United Union:. I was also involved as the only ip that had provided a comment (54.163.189.221). Also see this 89.164.217.100 (talk) 13:32, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Comment. I'd agree with removing the said passage for the same reasons I gave in the earlier RfC, but not for the reason stated above. The appeals chamber stated that “he Trial Chamber made no explicit findings concerning participation in the JCE and did not find them guilty of any crimes", but - if I understand correctly - this is a factually incorrect statement, because the Trial Chamber did precisely that. Miseticlaw.blogspot.hr sees this as a legal opinion, but I don't think it's legally possible to overturn the first degree verdict in an amicus curiae application ruling. This is a legal conundrum of sorts - IANAL, so I can only say that things seem illogical; apart from that, miseticlaw.blogspot.hr has a vested interest in interpreting the ruling in a particular way, and is therefore not a reliable secondary source. GregorB (talk) 13:51, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Comment. Why have the editors not yet either removed the references to the Trial Chamber's comments about Tudjman, or else allowed the quote from the Appeals Chamber to stand? The Appeals Chamber is the higher court. If it made an express conclusion that the Trial Chamber made no such findings about Tudjman, then the high court's findings should be included on Wiki as a counterpoint, in fairness. It is not for Misplaced Pages editors to censor the point because it believes that the higher court made a "factually incorrect statement". grabovcan
@GregorB: The ICTY found "that Tuđman was a key member of the joint criminal enterprise and that he intended to repopulate the Krajina with Croats. Other members of the joint criminal enterprise included Gojko Šušak, who was the Minister of Defence and a close associate of Tuđman’s, Zvonimir Červenko, the Chief of the Croatian army Main Staff. The members of the joint criminal enterprise also included others in the Croatian political and military leadership who participated in Presidential meetings and were close associates of Tuđman’s" (see ) Quis separabit?15:30, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
And now we have the appeals chamber saying that “he Trial Chamber made no explicit findings concerning participation in the JCE and did not find them guilty of any crimes". 89.164.217.100 (talk) 15:59, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, it was pointed out to my attention that the upper quote does not come from the trial judgement. I reviewed your source. This quote comes from a press release from 2011 Gotovina trials (which was later overturned). The source I had posted comes from the appeals chamber to Prlic and others, where some (including this article) had written that that trials chamber had found Tudjman a part of JCE. Now we have the appeals chamber findings. 89.164.217.100 (talk) 16:47, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Referencing and citation: criterion not met
Structure: criterion met
