Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
R-41 (talk | contribs)
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 6 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "C" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 4 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Kosovo}}, {{WikiProject Serbia}}, {{WikiProject International relations}}, {{WikiProject Politics}}.
 
(339 intermediate revisions by 51 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=30}}
{{WikiProject Kosovo|class=|importance=}}
{{WikiProject Serbia|class=|importance=}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=
{{WikiProject International relations}}
{{WikiProject Kosovo|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Serbia|importance=high}}
==Serbia involvment==
{{WikiProject International relations|importance=Low}}
I am not sure if [[Republic of Serbia]] is officially involved in conflicts. Kosovo Serbs are, however, Serbian Goverment participates only in negotiations and does not support rebelion.--[[User:DustBGD89-3|DustBGD89-3]] ([[User talk:DustBGD89-3|talk]]) 21:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Military history|class=C|b1=n|b2=y|b3=y|b4=y|b5=y|Balkan=y}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors|user=Twofingered Typist|date=20 September 2021}}
}}
{{Annual readership|days=180}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 2
|minthreadsleft = 4
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:North Kosovo crisis (2011–2013)/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=/Archive index
|mask=/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes
}}


== New name ==
== Border presentation proposal ==


As explaining the Kosovo borders can be bulky and with many of the terms not universally acceptable here, I would like to know how editors feel about this idea. Whenever discussing border crossings with the three non-disputed neighbours which all recognise Kosovo (Montenegro, Albania, Macedonia), the Kosovo template note suffices. On articles such as this and for all others concerning Serbia as controlled from Belgrade, that note doesn't fit in anywhere. Plain old "border" is used in sources but so are rerefernces to Kosovo as a country. On here we exercise tact and refer to the ''partially recognised state'' for the Republic of Kosovo on administrative matters, and the ''disputed region'' for the land itself or for non-administrative subjects. "Border", like "country" is defining in that it suggests a final status in black and white. Qualifiers such as ''administrative'' are fine by me but are dismissed by some editors as "weasel wording" and this might be leaning in the direction of a Serbian position because in truth, the ''administrative'' zones date back to 1999 when Yugoslavia withdrew all security forces pursuant to the Kumanovo agreement subsequently making Kosovo a separate entity from that point. Just now as I edited [[Vehicle registration plates of Kosovo]] I spotted what I hope might be the solution. On that article, the term '''"contested border"''' sits comfortably with no edit-warring taking place over it. It doesn't deny the republic, it doesn't deny Serbia's claim of Res. 1244, it is de facto operative no matter who controls it, and it is short and easy to type without long explanations. Can I see how editors feel about that suggestion?
[[2011 North Kosovo crisis]] is more descriptive--[[Special:Contributions/93.137.112.209|93.137.112.209]] ([[User talk:93.137.112.209|talk]]) 16:49, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:Feel free to start a [[WP:RM|requested move]]. [[User:Jenks24|Jenks24]] ([[User talk:Jenks24|talk]]) 17:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
::This may have more credence than the unilateral (and deceptive) move to [its current incarantion. (itf its a broder clash there has to be another border)[[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] ([[User talk:Lihaas|talk]]) 14:52, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
::::I woul dalso support this npov move.[[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] ([[User talk:Lihaas|talk]]) 18:06, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


Please note that a positive outcome may resolve matters across many articles and set a standard. [[User:Evlekis|Evlekis]] ('''Евлекис''') ([[User talk:Evlekis|argue]]) 15:35, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
== Title ==
:Sources just call the border a border - [http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2011/07/20117275833470595.html example]. Sources generally don't call it an "administrative border"; [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=North_Kosovo_crisis&diff=549239795&oldid=549237712 attempts] to add that are just [[WP:WEASEL|weasel wording]]. [[User:Bobrayner|bobrayner]] ([[User talk:Bobrayner|talk]]) 02:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
::Say something new, this argument was already refuted. --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:WhiteWriter|WhiteWriter]]<sup>[[User talk:WhiteWriter |speaks]]</sup></span> 21:38, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
::::Sources just call the border a border, rather than an "administrative crossing" or any other silly wording like that. If your political stance is not compatible with [[WP:V|what sources say]], you have my sympathies, but hitting the revert button won't change reality. [[User:Bobrayner|bobrayner]] ([[User talk:Bobrayner|talk]]) 01:11, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
:::::Agree, per my comment above. If someone finds a reliable source that uses the term "administrative crossing" then it could be used ''as well as'' what the current sources say, but in the absence of such sources, we use what the current sources used in the article say. [[User:Peacemaker67|Peacemaker67]] ([[User_talk:Peacemaker67#top|send... over]]) 01:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
User was blocked, but those sources are priceless...
*UNHCR: [http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain?page=country&category=&publisher=HRW&type=&coi=SRB&rid=&docid=4f7abd602&skip=0 The four Kosovo Serbs, including the Mayor of the town of Vitina, were arrested by Kosovo police as they tried to cross back into Kosovo at the Belja Zemlja '''administrative border''' between Serbia and Kosovo]
*UNMIK: [http://www.un.int/jamaica/sc/UNMIKApr9'01.htm We continue to call for increased surveillance of the '''administrative border''', in order to put an end to the extremist activities there and to stop the traffic in illegal weapons.]
*Amnesty: [http://www.amnesty.org/ar/library/asset/EUR70/020/2003/en/20fd17be-facd-11dd-b531-99d31a1e99e4/eur700202003en.pdf On 8 May 2003, the first group of remains identified by the ICMP using DNA analysis were handed over - at the '''administrative border''' between Serbia and Kosovo - to UNMIK by the Serbian Coordination Centre for Kosovo and Metohija.]
*VOA: [http://www.voanews.com/content/a-13-2007-04-27-voa28/342674.html Several thousand displaced ethnic Serbs and members of other minorities gathered at Kosovo's '''administrative border''' (Rudnice-Jarinja) to protest the U.N. plan and demand a return to their homes.]
*Helsinki Committee: [http://www.helsinki.org.rs/reports_t13.html The police check-points at the '''administrative border''' with Kosovo as well as houses of Serb civilians were targets of artillery attacks launched from the territory of Kosovo, mainly from Podujevo municipality.]
*CNN: [http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0003/16/i_wn.02.html Elsewhere in Kosovo, NATO peacekeeping forces seized an arsenal of weapons along the administrative border with Serbia.]<br>
It looks like sources generally '''do''' call it an "administrative border" --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:WhiteWriter|WhiteWriter]]<sup>[[User talk:WhiteWriter |speaks]]</sup></span> 23:21, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
:Only one of those sources is contemporary to the events that are the subject of this article, the HRW you have called "UNHCR". The rest pre-date the declaration of independence and are basically irrelevant to these events. Happy for the term to be added, so long as it does not replace the term "border". [[User:Peacemaker67|Peacemaker67]] ([[User_talk:Peacemaker67#top|send... over]]) 01:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::{{done}} --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:WhiteWriter|WhiteWriter]]<sup>[[User talk:WhiteWriter |speaks]]</sup></span> 22:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
:::fine by me. The article is still unbalanced, but hopefully this will stop the POV pushing. [[User:Peacemaker67|Peacemaker67]] ([[User_talk:Peacemaker67#top|send... over]]) 22:10, 30 May 2013 (UTC)


== The crisis in northern Kosovo is not yet complete. ==
There is no border between central Serbia and Kosovo and Metohia, just an administrative line. Border implies two equal entities. However, Kosovo and Metohia is regarded by majority of UN members as autonomous province of Serbia under temporary international rule, based on UN Resolution 1244.
Also, former title implied that Serbia was somehow involved in the incidents which is not the case. [[User:Perunova straža|Perunova straža]] ([[User talk:Perunova straža|talk]]) 12:14, 3 October 2011 (UTC)


The crisis in northern Kosovo is not finished until you create the [[Community of Serb municipalities, Kosovo]]. They are still in the course of the protests and barricades. I am an eyewitness.--[[Special:Contributions/79.101.223.175|79.101.223.175]] ([[User talk:79.101.223.175|talk]]) 13:06, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Further edits are done on order to have wording that represents the real situation, based on international law, treaties and documents, instead of one-sided biased view. [[User:Perunova straža|Perunova straža]] ([[User talk:Perunova straža|talk]]) 12:19, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
::Firstly consensus i\s not 1 editor, and to change the title in the box and lead change the article with consensus.
::Border does not mean to "equal entities" you have provincial borders and city district lines, etc.[[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] ([[User talk:Lihaas|talk]]) 04:33, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


== Edits explained ==
== External links modified ==


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
#[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=455396311&oldid=455340312 unexplained][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453267953&oldid=453240089][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=449724861&oldid=449172836]
#[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=454916134&oldid=453723756 unexplained an dunsourced][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=450811238&oldid=449996422]
#[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453723756&oldid=453720480 per title sectio above and pov][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453706149&oldid=453697610][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453697610&oldid=453694853][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453694846&oldid=453694459][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453694108&oldid=453693927][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453693487&oldid=453693020][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453691935&oldid=453687186][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453686952&oldid=453686557][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453686557&oldid=453686421][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453686020&oldid=453347932]
#[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=453720480&oldid=453706149 edit war without consensus to restore]
#[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=452880775&oldid=452773186 pov]
#[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=445647748&oldid=445343344 not done]
#[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Kosovo%E2%80%93Serbia_border_clashes&diff=446117737&oldid=445647852 2 words?][[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] ([[User talk:Lihaas|talk]]) 04:40, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[North Kosovo crisis]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=707879806 my edit]. If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
== Requested move ==
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121001164116/http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/ksfr/news.newsmain/article/0/0/1836135/World/Kosovo.says.will.not.accept.NATO-Serbia.deal to http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/ksfr/news.newsmain/article/0/0/1836135/World/Kosovo.says.will.not.accept.NATO-Serbia.deal


When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).
{{Requested move/dated|2011 North Kosovo crisis}}


{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}
[[2011 Kosovo–Serbia border clashes]] → [[2011 North Kosovo crisis]] –


Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier;">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green;">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 09:31, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Entire situation is by far bigger then just border or administrative line, and at the end, new title is NPOV, as Serbia's POV is that we dont have border between Kosovo and Serbia, but just administrative line. All sources points that North Kosovo is location of this events, and not just thin line in question... --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:WhiteWriter |WhiteWriter ]]<sup>[[User talk:WhiteWriter |speaks]]</sup></span> 01:15, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. Has it really been commonly described as a "crisis", though? I've heard much talk of "clashes", but not a "crisis". [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 06:20, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
::Well, there is numerous sources for this. [http://www.kurir-info.rs/vesti/kriza-na-kosovu/hronologija-krize-na-severu-kim-125612.php CHRONOLOGY OF CRISIS IN NORTHERN KIM], [http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/solution-to-north-kosovo-crisis-in-sight Solution to North Kosovo Crisis "In Sight"], [http://www.balcanicaucaso.org/eng/Regions-and-countries/Kosovo/The-northern-Kosovo-crisis-99511 The northern Kosovo crisis], [http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=08&dd=04&nav_id=75754 "Sides close to solution to north Kosovo crisis"], etc, etc... --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:WhiteWriter |WhiteWriter ]]<sup>[[User talk:WhiteWriter |speaks]]</sup></span> 16:21, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. After a bit of googling around, it does seem to me that the proposed name is more common, and it has the benefit of neutrality to boot. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 01:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


== Third phase? ==
== Brussels Agreement ==


The Brussels Agreement needs to get expanded, or deleted. I request permission to delete the section.
Should we consider these new attacks as a phase number three?
[[User:GermanGamer77|<span style="color:black">German</span>]][[User talk:GermanGamer77|<span style="color:red">Gamer</span>]][[Special:Contributions/GermanGamer77|<span style="color:gold">77</span>]] 21:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Responce appreciated. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/212.124.173.7|212.124.173.7]] ([[User talk:212.124.173.7|talk]]) 15:53, 25 November 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Hmmm, i would say yes... --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:WhiteWriter |WhiteWriter ]]<sup>[[User talk:WhiteWriter |speaks]]</sup></span> 16:16, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

== KFOR is not a pro-Albanian force, it is officially neutral, it has fought with ex-KLA forces as well as Serb forces ==

KFOR is not a pro-Albanian force as some have claimed, it has fought ex-KLA forces, though it has miserably failed in the aftermath of the Kosovo War to protect Serb civilians from ethnic Albanian nationalist militants. See this reference: [http://books.google.ca/books?id=lEuAsrRADOoC&pg=PA373&dq=kfor+serbia&hl=en&ei=1u_TTpriIaXW0QH89-BM&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CFIQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=kfor%20serbia&f=false]

KFOR is part of the UNMIK mission in Kosovo. Claims that KFOR is pro-Albanian are common by Serb nationalist and anti-NATO sources, but the reality is that KFOR was created part of a UN-authorized mission with the UN Security Council voting in favour - including Russia (that is widely considered pro-Serbian on Kosovo issues). Generally pro-Serbian governments in Russia and Greece have historically sent soldiers to take part in KFOR.--[[User:R-41|R-41]] ([[User talk:R-41|talk]]) 21:09, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
:Can you please point where in article is KFOR claimed as Albanian? Thanks for invite. --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:WhiteWriter |WhiteWriter ]]<sup>[[User talk:WhiteWriter |speaks]]</sup></span> 21:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
::In the infobox KFOR is put on the side of the Albanian-majority led Republic of Kosovo government versus the Serb-majority led [[North Kosovo]]. It is part of UNMIK, that is officially neutral on the ethnic-Albanian vs. Serb ethnic conflict.--[[User:R-41|R-41]] ([[User talk:R-41|talk]]) 21:28, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
:::But, in this moment, KFOR is opposed to Serbs of Kosovo, and not RoK. [http://www.rts.rs/page/stories/ci/story/1/%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0/998834/%D0%9A%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%80+%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BE+%D0%B1%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%83+%D0%BD%D0%B0+%D0%88%D0%B0%D0%B3%D1%9A%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B8.html Сукоби на Јагњеници] {{sr icon}} Your edits are factually incorrect. KFOR is NOT officially neutral in this situation, it IS on the side of the RoK, as they try to push RoK's politics, using brutal force. If you want to place KFOR in the neutral section (where they are not) you will have to gain consensus with more then 6 different users agreeing. --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:WhiteWriter |WhiteWriter ]]<sup>[[User talk:WhiteWriter |speaks]]</sup></span> 21:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
:::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK5sX0NX8VY Here] you can see that, so called neutral, KFOR pushing away and beating peaceful sitting protest in Jagnjenica. In this moment, KFOR is using force over Serb civil population to establish RoK politics and borders on [[North Kosovo]]. That is very definition what neutral mission should not do. Wikipedia must be neutral, in the meaning that must present thing as they are, and not as they should be. --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:WhiteWriter |WhiteWriter ]]<sup>[[User talk:WhiteWriter |speaks]]</sup></span> 21:51, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
::::From the video that appears like standard riot patrol, plus the protestors were provoking the guards, it was not a sitting protest. KFOR was sent to Kosovo keep ethnic Albanians and Serbs from attacking and killing each other. If KFOR does not show up to put itself between Albanians and Serbs, the [[Kosovo Security Force]] would be there and Albanians and Serbs would likely start killing each other. Plus the video is a short, edited clip from [[Radio Television Serbia]] a state-sponsored public broadcaster is hardly a neutral source, the Government of Serbia has a stake in the Albanian-Serb ethnic conflict in Kosovo. Look, don't pretend that this is a normal topic, this is a topic about a long-term vicious and murderous ethnic conflict that involves long-held xenophobia and ethnic cleansing by both sides, ethnic Albanian and Serb; I clearly understand that you fully support the Serbian position, and have a predisposition to oppose the Albanian side. Ethnic Albanians and Serbs regularly issue death threats to each other over the internet and call each other vulgar and racist terms; so a report exclusively one side or the other is not reliable, the two sides generally viciously hate each other. Yes, the Western-led component of KFOR probably do have a bias against Serb side, because Western states were blamed by their populations for not doing enough to stop the ethnic cleansing of the Karadzic government of Srpska that Milosevic and his ally in the federal Yugoslav government, Borislav Jovic, agreed to provide financial assistance to and military equipment to Srpska; and the belief by the West that history would repeat itself in Kosovo, if Milosevic's government and Serb nationalist paramilitaries were not stopped in 1999. As I said, KFOR was created by the United Nations as part of [[United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo|UNMIK]], with the support pro-Serbian Russia in the UN Security Council, and has had pro-Serbian governments take part in KFOR peacekeeping operations, including Russia and Greece. KFOR has fought against both Serb paramilitary forces and ex-KLA Albanian paramilitary forces to maintain order in Kosovo.--[[User:R-41|R-41]] ([[User talk:R-41|talk]]) 23:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
:::::First, this '''was''' sitting protest, video is of the afterwards. Google Jagnjenica. "protestors were provoking"? O c'mon... Again, you explained very well what is the reason for KFOR's existence, and what is their supposed mission, but i didn't talk about past. I am interested in 25 July 2011, and after. In that time, KFOR is not neutral. I dont see how barricade may take peoples life? Barricade is peaceful protest, opposition to the forced politics! But KFOR is trying to brake down the barricade, and push, by force, RoK Albanian custom workers into North Kosovo, what is against agreements. That is cause of the problem in the moment! RoK is not participating, as KFOR is doing their job. KFOR is not neutral in here, KFOR is on RoK's side in this conflict. KFOR is helping RoK to gain full control over entire Kosovo territory, what they should not do. KFOR is directly against Serbia and their citizens, and against political and national will of the [[Serbs of Kosovo]], what we can se by their tearing down of the barricades. Neither KFOR, nor UNMIK should have political attitude in here. They suppose just to stop violance, and to stop possibility of the new war. That is their primary goal in there. KFOR did helped in the past, that is out of the question, but also, they failed to help when [[2004 unrest in Kosovo|it was the most important]]. You should have in mind that Eastern world have very different attitude toward UNMIK role in Kosovo then the western world (of which you are a member, as you said so your self). In that same atmosphere, Wikipedia should represent factographic trace in time, and not supposed one. --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:WhiteWriter |WhiteWriter ]]<sup>[[User talk:WhiteWriter |speaks]]</sup></span> 14:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
::::::KFOR has to be able to maintain order and stability over the whole of Kosovo as described in the mandate of UNMIK. The Serb protestors are barricading their entrance into the area, and it is well known that the Serbs are planning to secede the north from the Albanian-majority south that the RoK refuses to accept - that will cause a war. Plus there are far more international issues at play that just disgruntled Serbs in North Kosovo. If North Kosovo is allowed to secede, this will set an international precedent for any ethnic enclave to secede, including the Albanians of the Republic of Macedonia, the Turks of Cyprus, the Basques in Spain - a sure cause for ethnic conflict. As I said, do not ignore the fact that Albanians and Serbs generally viciously hate each other, if KFOR doesn't get inbetween Serbs protestors and Albanian law enforcement, they WILL kill each other.--[[User:R-41|R-41]] ([[User talk:R-41|talk]]) 16:17, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:12, 21 February 2024


Border presentation proposal[edit]

As explaining the Kosovo borders can be bulky and with many of the terms not universally acceptable here, I would like to know how editors feel about this idea. Whenever discussing border crossings with the three non-disputed neighbours which all recognise Kosovo (Montenegro, Albania, Macedonia), the Kosovo template note suffices. On articles such as this and for all others concerning Serbia as controlled from Belgrade, that note doesn't fit in anywhere. Plain old "border" is used in sources but so are rerefernces to Kosovo as a country. On here we exercise tact and refer to the partially recognised state for the Republic of Kosovo on administrative matters, and the disputed region for the land itself or for non-administrative subjects. "Border", like "country" is defining in that it suggests a final status in black and white. Qualifiers such as administrative are fine by me but are dismissed by some editors as "weasel wording" and this might be leaning in the direction of a Serbian position because in truth, the administrative zones date back to 1999 when Yugoslavia withdrew all security forces pursuant to the Kumanovo agreement subsequently making Kosovo a separate entity from that point. Just now as I edited Vehicle registration plates of Kosovo I spotted what I hope might be the solution. On that article, the term "contested border" sits comfortably with no edit-warring taking place over it. It doesn't deny the republic, it doesn't deny Serbia's claim of Res. 1244, it is de facto operative no matter who controls it, and it is short and easy to type without long explanations. Can I see how editors feel about that suggestion?

Please note that a positive outcome may resolve matters across many articles and set a standard. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 15:35, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources just call the border a border - example. Sources generally don't call it an "administrative border"; attempts to add that are just weasel wording. bobrayner (talk) 02:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Say something new, this argument was already refuted. --WhiteWriterspeaks 21:38, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sources just call the border a border, rather than an "administrative crossing" or any other silly wording like that. If your political stance is not compatible with what sources say, you have my sympathies, but hitting the revert button won't change reality. bobrayner (talk) 01:11, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, per my comment above. If someone finds a reliable source that uses the term "administrative crossing" then it could be used as well as what the current sources say, but in the absence of such sources, we use what the current sources used in the article say. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User was blocked, but those sources are priceless...

It looks like sources generally do call it an "administrative border" --WhiteWriterspeaks 23:21, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Only one of those sources is contemporary to the events that are the subject of this article, the HRW you have called "UNHCR". The rest pre-date the declaration of independence and are basically irrelevant to these events. Happy for the term to be added, so long as it does not replace the term "border". Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --WhiteWriterspeaks 22:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
fine by me. The article is still unbalanced, but hopefully this will stop the POV pushing. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 22:10, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The crisis in northern Kosovo is not yet complete.[edit]

The crisis in northern Kosovo is not finished until you create the Community of Serb municipalities, Kosovo. They are still in the course of the protests and barricades. I am an eyewitness.--79.101.223.175 (talk) 13:06, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on North Kosovo crisis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:31, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Brussels Agreement[edit]

The Brussels Agreement needs to get expanded, or deleted. I request permission to delete the section. GermanGamer77 21:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply