Talk:Operation Jackal

More informative infobox?
Perhaps this article would benefit from a more informative infobox that summarized the forces (armour, artillery, etc) available on both sides, and indeed listed the outcome of the operation as one might expect for such a box. Overall the article could similarly benefit from additional overview to assist the reader who may be unfamiliar with the acronyms and historic details. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes that would be nice, but there are simply no WP:RS on that type of detail. All acronyms are already provided with spelled out versions of particular names at the first instance.--Tomobe03 (talk) 01:17, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * At least the infobox can spell out who won, it's usual for mil op infoboxes. And anything else that can be done to make the article more comprehensible will be an improvement. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:32, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Readability
Here's an example:

"The HV concluded that the JNA offensive operations of April and May 1992 capturing Kupres and much of the Neretva River valley south of Mostar were aimed at capturing or threatening Croatian Port of Ploče and possibly Split, leading the Croatian leadership to deploy the HV to the area and assign General Janko Bobetko as the commanding officer of the "Southern Front" theatre of operations encompassing the area of Operation Jackal."

The quoted sentence has 71 words and at least 7 verbs. Its Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level is 33.0 (i.e. extremely few people can understand it), and its Flesch Reading Ease is 0% (i.e. extremely unreadable). I don't recall ever seeing a 0% on this measure before. I tried splitting it into 5 short sentences, giving an F-K Grade Level of 10.5 (i.e. a grade 10 school pupil can read it) and reading ease of 46.6%.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to scan the article for other sentences with complex structure. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:43, 11 April 2013 (UTC)