Talk:May Coup (Serbia)

The term assassination is preferred
For the murder of political figures, assassination is the accurate term, not killing or murder.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:36, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * As you are aware of the course of events stated here, if you consider that so called political figures are individuals as others, would referring to anything other than killing and murder not be insulting, formalistic attire to such a vicious slaughtering and such most miserable cravings for power? I am sorry but what I read here, including a government apparently pervaded by abominable elements of such ambushment allowed to carry on, it has moved me. lmaxmai 23 October 2020

Serbian references would be useful
At the moment there is only a single reference,-albeit a good one, by American C.L. Sulzberger, who actually interviewed members of the assassination squad. Another source, preferably Serbian, would be useful, to add balance so it doesn't give a single American POV.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:34, 14 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Could You translate from Serbian. Google Translate did it well, I think You would understand it. Unfortunately, I can't provide any Serbian sources. --  Bojan   Talk   12:06, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it would be better if I enlisted the aid of User:Surtsicna, who is familiar with Balkans history. I just added another section to the article, which provides a historical background to the coup. What do you think? Do you think you can provide more details which led to the coup and assassination? IMO, the stub tag can be removed now.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 12:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

It is unknown to me that Russians took part in the coup. Nikolay Romanov was Alexander's best man or something like that. He showed disgust (partly due to fear that he will share same fate, as indeed happened) I think that Alexander never waged open pro-Austrian policy like his father Milan. He tried to balance between those powers. How does Mr(s). Sulzberger explain this? --  Bojan   Talk   13:08, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That is why we need another source to balance Sulzberger's. He is decidely pro-Karadordevic; in fact he dedicated his book to Paul Karadordevic.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Since Christopher Clark is a sharp critic of Serbia and ascribes it considerable responsibility for the outbreak of World War I, his book is a kind of counterstatement to Sulzberger. Southeast Europe expert Prof. Dr. Holm Sundhaussen confirms Clark "As far as Serbia is concerned, he describes the events correctly, even if his love of storytelling sometimes leads him to exaggerate statements." XeniaBW (talk) 17:33, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Why is this article rated as Low importance?
Considering this coup was the first bloody step on the fateful march which ultimately led to World War I, I would rate this as Mid-importance.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I added the template. I usually err on the side of "stub/low" and let others upgrade. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:39, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it's been upgraded to Mid-importance now. I gave it a C-class. With some work and more refs, it could rate a B-class.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed it could. Well done. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I have a book which relates the event; I had just read it about six months ago, so I thought I'd give a hand to editing this article.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I cannot but agree with you respectively to your first sentence above. And apparently since, others could not either. lmaxmai 23 October 2020
 * At least since Christopher Clark's world-famous book "The Sleepwalkers", probably the most cited and respected book about the causes that finally led to the outbreak of the First World War, we have known that this event has the greatest imaginable importance. It is not without reason that Clark's book begins with a chapter called "Serbian Ghosts - Murder in Belgrade", in which he goes into detail about the bloody deed of June 11, 1903. XeniaBW (talk) 17:03, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Confusing sentence
The last sentence in Historical background section doesn't make much sense. The Google translation from the Serbian into English doesn't clear it up. I did what I could to make it work, but is still hard to figure out.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

This was the final political victory for King Alexander I.? --  Bojan   Talk   16:30, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No, the bit about Ivandan attempt on former King Milan. Who was Ivandan and what did he do?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:32, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Ivan(j)dan is Orthodox holiday (Saint John's day). On that day, a man tried to assassinate former king Milan. Bacround og the attempt is not clear, but Milan accused his archenemies, the People's Radical Party, and pursued leaders of the party. I was may mistake. You should remove 's, it is not a person --  Bojan   Talk   16:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Black Hand
Black Hand (or Unification or Death) didn't exist at time of coup. It was formed 6 years later by Apis, Tankosić and rest of gang. --  Bojan   Talk   19:25, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? Perhaps it existed under a different name? Historian Sulzberger maintains that it already existed by 1903.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:51, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Army officers conspiracy
in reference to "After another failed attempt to kill the Royal couple on the fiftieth anniversary celebration of the Belgrade Choral Society" Any further information available on this where it took place and why it failed and who was involved in this10:48, 13 February 2018 (UTC)10:48, 13 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.228.191.237 (talk)