Talk:Battles for Vuksan and Matejče

Vandalism by User Hollowww
The user Hollowww claims that in the battle of Vuksan, Albanian irregulars also known as Kachaks participated in the battle. For this, he uses a website (https://web.archive.org/web/20231003214023/http://arhiva.glas-javnosti.rs/arhiva/2003/03/09/srpski/F03030802.shtml) as a source, which states this:

"Borba na Vuksanu - Na Uskrs, 30. aprila, opkoljena je 35-člana četa Koste Milovanovića - Pećanca jakim turskim snagama. Borba je započela u zoru i okončana je kasno u noć uspešnim probojem četnika. Poginula su četiri četnika, dok su Turci imali 40 mrtvih i ranjenih. (Vuksan je lokalitet iznad manastira Mateič u Skopskoj Crnoj Gori)."

Translated:

"Battle at Vuksan - On Easter, April 30, the 35-member Cheta of Kosta Milovanović - Pećan was encircled by larger Turkish forces. The battle began at dawn and ended late at night with a breakthrough by the Chetniks. Four Chetniks were killed, while the Turks had 40 dead and wounded. (Vuksan is a locality above the Matejče monastery in the Skopska Crna Gora)."

Now, as we can see, the source clearly states that Ottoman forces fought in this battle and not Albanian irregulars (Kachaks). Moreover, the source claims that the Chetniks were encircled by the Ottomans but managed to break through and retreat, so the battle was neither a Chetnik nor an Ottoman victory. GermanManFromFrankfurt (talk) 08:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I also wanted to add that there is an existing page about the battle on the Serbian Wikipedia, which User Hollowww appears to have copied and pasted, merely editing the result of the battle to push his agenda. Similarly, the page on the Serbian Wikipedia claims that the battle was inconclusive and not a Chetnik victory, and it also makes no mention of Albanian irregulars participating in it.
 * https://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-el/Битка_на_Вуксану GermanManFromFrankfurt (talk) 08:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Great find. Not to mention many of these sources don’t seem to pass WP:RS and are outdated. Unless the article is updated appropriately, it should be deleted. Additionally, I believe the user Hollowww warns some admin attention unless they can explain why they chose to make things up on this article. Botushali (talk) 12:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)