This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Draža Mihailović article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Draža Mihailović is within the scope of WikiProject Yugoslavia, a collaborative effort to improve the Wikipedia 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
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 articles
In this case, it is inappropriate to include DM's war crimes conviction in the first sentence, as it was overturned by a Serbian court. It is covered in the lead, along with the overturning, but it isn't appropriate in the first sentence. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:23, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
He was tried and convicted of high treason and war crimes by the communist authorities of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia, and executed by firing squad in Belgrade. The nature and extent of his responsibility for collaboration and ethnic massacres remains controversial. On 14 May 2015, Mihailović's verdict was overturned on appeal with the ruling showing that his trial amounted to a communist kangaroo court. The Supreme Court of Cassation, and appellate court handed out the rulings. While some see this as a rehabilitation, the courts did not go that far, and only ruled on the previous trial without offering to retry the case. This was done to satisfy his offspring's legal rights to property which the ruling at his trial stripped from them. You mean this? I think this is too much information's for the introductory part. It is probably information's for "Capture, trial and execution" section. In the introductory part there could be one sentence or as far as I am concerned nothing about this. Mikola22 (talk) 20:03, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Mihailović was in fact tried in a kangaroo court and in fact never collaborated with the Nazis. It is recommended that one read “The Forgotten 500” to know the true story of this hero of WWII who was falsely accused of treason and executed by Tito to silence him. 174.208.228.141 (talk) 20:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Amanuensis Balkanicus: Publisher is "Udruženje Španski borci 1936-1939 u saradnji sa Fakultetom političkih nauka Univerziteta u Beogradu..Spanish Fighters Association 1936-1939 in cooperation with the Faculty of Political Sciences, University of Belgrade. Some of the authors Latinka Perović, Husnija Kamberović, Olivera Milosavljević (Serbian historian), Dr Olga Manojlović Pintar (Institute for Recent History of Serbia) etc. This source has no problem and you return informations back to the article. Thank you in advance. Mikola22 (talk) 19:49, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
According to the Julian Calendar, Draža Mihailović was born on 14 April 1893. I want to emphasize that many authors don’t acknowledge that the difference between the Julian and Gregorian calendars was not 13 but 12 days in the 19th century. Thus many sources state that Draža was born on 27 April, but that is a mistake, since 14 + 12 = 26. Historian Kosta Nikolić corrected this mistake in his biography of Mihailović. (Here, page 15). DysFunctional3 (talk) 22:19, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt Nikolić is a reliable source, as he is a highly biased source on DM. He is a well-known historical revisionist, and an apologist for DM, Nedić and other collaborators, and also highly biased against the Partisans, and is also the author of a highly controversial school book that contradicts the academic consensus on WWII in Yugoslavia, and minimises the crimes of the collaborators against Jews in Serbia, Banjica concentration camp etc. It cannot be disregarded that Tomasevich and Britannica also shows 27 April. I haven't looked further, but I imagine everyone says 27 April except Nikolić. Perhaps a footnote explaining what Nikolić thinks about his date of birth, but that's about it. The article should continue to state 27 April until the academic consensus changes. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that Nikolić is generally not a reliable source concerning the military and political history of Chetniks, since he is a revisionist historian. Still, I doubt his bias is distinct regarding the birthdate of Draža. I know that Tomasevich (who was, by the way, an economist and not an historian) and EB state that Draža was born on 27 April, and I have already answered this objection by pointing out that there is a confusion in the domestic literature when it comes to converting from Julian calendar to Gregorian.
The common trope that Tomasevich was an economist and not a historian is a classic Serb revisionist argument. The same is said of Ramet. It is a joke, frankly, and no-one who has read the many positive reviews of their work on WWII in Yugoslavia would give it any credence at all. There are plenty of Serb and Croat academics who have academic qualifications in history whose writings are highly POV and based on extremely dubious interpretations of the facts (or in many cases "alternative facts"). Facebook isn't a reliable source, and neither is the SPO. Your assumption about the calendar corrections is based on your own observations, and that is classic WP:OR. As I said, the best way of handling this in the absence of a clearly reliable source is a note regarding what Nikolić reckons. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:58, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
