Talk:Dayton Agreement

diplomacy
in the bbc's death of yugoslavia it explains that karadzic surrendered diplomatic authority to milosevic is this the same in tudjmans case? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.177.97.92 (talk) 18:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Removed NPOV text
I have removed the third point of the "Analysis and criticism" section. Although referenced, it clearly does not comply with WP:NPOV. The reference given is a spurious "declaration". --Viennese Waltz 12:38, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dayton Agreement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060524164925/http://www.usip.org/events/2005/1121_dayton.html to http://www.usip.org/events/2005/1121_dayton.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:35, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Recent additions
Hi. I reverted your addition not because of RS problems, but because it contained several mistakes. The source mentions the SDA leader visiting Turkey, but Bakir Izetbegović isn't the leader of the Federation, as you conveyed it. Similarly, Milorad Dodik isn't "head of the Republika Srpska" but one of the members of the state presidency. I wouldn't describe the Federation and the RS as "semi-nations" - they're more like mini states than nations. "Everyone remembers the horrible Civil War" doesn't seem very encyclopedic (and many Bosnians were born after the war in any case). Many would also contest that it was a "three-way war between the Orthodox Serbs, the Catholic Croats, and the Muslim Bosniaks" - Croats and Serbs also fought on the Bosnian government side, for instance. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:48, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * We fix mistakes, not erase whole sections. I made the fix. As for being encyclopedic, we follow the RS and current 2019 reporting from the leading news magazine in Britain is solidly encyclopedic. Your vague unsourced claim that "Many would also contest..." can open a debate on the talk page -0-assuming you actually have reliable sources--but explain your sources on Talk before you erase text based on RS.  Wiki NPOV rules require all significant viewpoints supported by RS be included and none excluded. (The Economist said, "Some 100,000 people died in the three-way war between the country's communities: its Orthodox Serbs, its Catholic Croats and its Muslims (often referred to as Bosniaks)."  PEW Research states: "The war was fought largely along ethno-religious lines, among predominantly Orthodox Christian Serbs, Muslim Bosniaks and Catholic Croats" [at https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/10/how-bosnian-muslims-view-christians-20-years-after-srebrenica-massacre-2/].  see also Oxford Handbooks at https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935420.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199935420-e-37 which states "Hence it is religion coupled with ethnic myths that highlights most visibly differences and boundaries between these groups. The Serbs are Eastern-Orthodox Christians, the Croats are Roman Catholics, and the Bosnian Muslims are South Slavs Islamicized through the Ottoman Turkish conquest."  Rjensen (talk) 14:21, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Above all, please take complaints to the talk page first.
 * Sorry,, but please see WP:BRD. You made a bold addition to the article, which contained a significant number of factual errors, so I reverted it. The next step is then to discuss it here, not to reinstate the material uncorrected, as you did. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:40, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * On the specific point about the nature of the conflict, the key here is the point made in that Pew source: "largely along ethno-religious lines, among predominantly..." rather than exclusively. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Is the lead NPOV by only containing criticism?
I genuinely ask. Does it reflect the weight and balance of RS and expert assessments? Snooganssnoogans (talk) 13:56, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

photo was tagged for reference
I see that in Dec 2020, the photo caption for the Serbs being forced from their home was tagged for a cite - while this should have been done when submitted to Commons (???) it most definitely should be in this article. This was submitted as 'author's own work' by User:Paalso, who seems to have left the project after 2014. 50.111.51.247 (talk) 12:41, 10 March 2021 (UTC)