This article is about a short-lived collaborationist puppet government established by Nazi Germany in territory they retained under military occupation after the partition of Yugoslavia following the April 1941 Axis invasion. The members were pro-German, anti-Semitic and anti-communist, and believed that Germany would win the war. The Aćimović government lacked any semblance of power, and was merely an instrument of the German occupation regime, carrying out its orders within the occupied territory of Serbia. Unable to cope with a mass uprising which began in early July, it was replaced in late August. To my eternal embarrassment, many years ago I AfD'd this article, thinking it wasn't notable. So I've effectively rescued it from myself... All comments gratefully received. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:45, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's not right. Under Serbian copyright law, photographs are out of copyright 25 years after being taken. Aćimović died in 1945, so this was out of copyright in 1970 at the latest. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:33, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Serbia says that Serbian photographs must meet one of the following conditions: "A work of known authorship and the author died before January 1, 1954. An anonymous work published before January 1, 1954. A photograph or a work of applied art published before January 1, 1973". Furthermore, and contradictorarily, the copyright term was later extended to publication + 70 years, even for photographs (although that was after URAA and wouldn't affect PD-US status). buidhe08:41, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Passing the review, although I would strongly recommend scaling the image of Aćimović down to upright=1 or less. On my screen it looks grotesquely large. buidhe08:00, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The new administration was experienced, as like Aćimović, Jojić, Letica and Pantić had all served as ministers in various cabinets, Josifović and Protić had been assistant ministers, Kostić was a university professor, and others were experts in their respective fields." I would suggest a semi-colon after "experienced" and dropping the "as" there.
"Non-Serbs who left the occupied territory had to be replaced..." Was there a lot of non-Serbs in government positions at this time? It sounds like there wasn't, but if there is a way to give that context it would be good. I'm not sure how to best note that now, but I'll wait to hear back before offering suggestions.
"Aćimović initially retained his position as Minister of the Interior." The wording here implies he lost his position, but the next sentence says he died in 1945. Did he hold the ministry from 1941 to 1945, or did he move between then? I would also suggest linking Chetnik there.
In the "Analysis" section, would it be possible to include the Communist Yugoslavian and independent Serbian views of the government? I understand that the Croatian Ustase (and the NDH in general) is a contentious topic, and wonder if the same can be said for this government as well. If such historiography exists, it would seem good to include.
Outside of the military commander's staff...: I assume this is Australian English we're using here? In BrEng I'd cut the "of", and I thought Australian English was closer to BrEng on this, but you would know.
That's all I can see; the prose is very clean. An interesting if unpleasant story. Has there ever been a successful FAC nominated by someone who had nominated the article for deletion? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article never explains the divergent translations "Commissioner" and "Commissar", and does not provide a source for the latter. If most English sources (80–90%) use the former name, I would just omit the second one. buidhe04:24, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"They did this to secure" It may be worth reminding a reader who "They" are?
"This was due to the key rail and riverine transport routes that passed through it, and its valuable resources, particularly non-ferrous metals" Is this not redundant, given that the same information is repeated in more detail in the next two sentences?
It seems to me that chronologically the second paragraph of "Establishment" should be immediately before "Förster decided on Aćimović, who in early 1939 had briefly been Minister of the Interior in Stojadinović's pro-Axis government." I find the jumping around in time a little jarring.
"requiring the registration of printing presses and restrictions on the press within the occupied territory" maybe 'imposing' immediately before "restrictions".
"3.81 million inhabitants, including between 50 and 60 per cent of Yugoslav Serbs" Maybe '3.81 million inhabitants, of whom between 50 and 60 per cent were Yugoslav Serbs'?
I have been impressed with the prose and its clarity, but it seems to me to break down a little in the last three sentences of the firdt paragraph of "Resistance increases". It seems to me to need either more context or less information:
It was only "when ... Danckelmann ... was unable to obtain more German troops or police to suppress the revolt" that "he had to consider every option available". Is this not something which an efficient administrator and/or military person would be expected to do anyway?
"As Danckelmann had been told to use available forces as ruthlessly as possible, Turner suggested that Danckelmann strengthen the Aćimović administration so that it might subdue the rebellion on its own." I don't see where "as ruthlessly as possible" comes into this.
"Turner suggested that Danckelmann strengthen the Aćimović administration so that it might subdue the rebellion on its own. The Germans were dissatisfied with the Aćimović administration's attempts at countering the uprising." Is this meant to suggest that Danckelmann acted on Turner's suggestion. Was Danckelmann one of the Germans who was dissatisfied?
"Aćimović, whose sacking the Germans had been considering since mid-July, was thus deemed incompetent" I kind of 'get' this sentence, but it seems to run two issues together. If he was considered incompetent for failing to quash the rising, say so; if there were other, separate, issues, state them and do so separately.
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the ((featured article candidates)) template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
.jpg){kind=link}
