This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Kosovo Start‑class Peja is part of WikiProject Kosovo, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Kosovo on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.KosovoWikipedia:WikiProject KosovoTemplate:WikiProject KosovoKosovo articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Serbia Start‑class High‑importance 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 Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Albania Start‑class Peja is part of the WikiProject Albania, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Albania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.AlbaniaWikipedia:WikiProject AlbaniaTemplate:WikiProject AlbaniaAlbania articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Cities Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Again, can we list these as stubs? There is a lot more to say about it!2toise 18:33, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)

A lot of articles on cities in Serbia and Montenegro are such. I don't know is there any sense in listing all of them as stubs... Nikola 06:34, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I have been unable to verify the changes made by an anonymous editor (155.245.229.20, a known vandal) relating to the administrative role of Pec, although I blame my own fact finding skills. Can someone verify these changes or perform a rollback if needed?--BakerQ 14:46, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

Pec is a municipal center, but municipalities don't have articles yet and are not linked from articles on their cities. When some articles are created, it will make sense to link to them along with the districts. Nikola 09:17, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

--How about that League of Peja huh? I guess it was pretty important considering this is supposed to be NPOV, or should I wait until Kosova gets official* independence?

hehehe one more funny little thing...since the article mentions that there is a large Turkish minority, the reader would assume that the rest is Serbian huh - user —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.163.17.19 (talk • contribs) 06:11, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I removed some Serbian propaganda as well as some factual mistakes. It is not true that there is a significant Turkish minority. There are a maximum of 200-400 Turkish speaking people in Peja. That’s hardly a significant minority.--Ferick 18:44, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally I am the writer of that page as I it was copied from a website I used to manage/own. So such talk of me having copied copyrighted material is not true. People at Albanian.com will tell you so if you ask them. In any case, I will not revert it back as I think you did a pretty good job in summarizing the history of the city. I still think there is room for improvement thought. May I ask you why you removed the picture? For your information, that picture is not copyrighted by that Albanian page either. Changes made: “It also gained an Islamic character with the construction of a number of mosques, several of which still survive.” The word several will be changed to “many” as that is a more accurate description of the current situation.

“The 14th century Dečani Monastery, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, lies about 19 km south of Peć” has been changed to “The 14th century Dečani Monastery, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, lies about 19 km south of Peć in nearby Decani”. Your sentence leaves the impression that Decani Monastery is in Pec, which is clearly no the case. The Decani Monastery is in Decani, a different city, and there is no reason why that shouldn’t be mentioned.

Questions:

I am actually thinking about removing any reference to the Decani Monastery completely as it has nothing to do with Pec. Give me a reason why I shouldn’t remove it?

Another question: You mention Serb institution by name, e.i Decani Monastery, by name even though they are not in the city, but you fail to mention any Albanian institutions, e.i the Bajrakli mosque and League of Peja etc, that are actually in the city and therefore more relevant to this page. Explanations please! Again, these are some of the reasons why there is room for improvement. I look forward to your answers and the dialogue.--Ferick 14:22, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Added League of Peja. I am banned from Kosovo topics, however exempted for national movements such as League of Peja and League of Prizren. sulmues (talk)--Sulmues 22:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If sombody have UN acceptit evidence that the name of the city is not Peja but is Pec, then this articel must be unter the name: Peja and the page named "Peć" must be redirect. My evidence you kann see in UNMIK oficiale page.--Hipi Zhdripi 00:17, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that. This city is called Peja. We could make a redirect for Peć.--Mig11 21:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. Here in Kosovo, everyone knows the town as Peja. Official UNMIK and OSCE documents call it Peja/Peć (official style gives the Albanian name first, then the Serbian name), but nobody calls it Peć except in reference to the Patriarchate. 80.80.161.137 08:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree that the name of the city is Peja. Please change to "Peja" and have "Peć" redirect to "Peja".sulmues-- 19:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The user of the city names in English Language (newer version from the UN liable pilari in Kosovo for such think )

1. http://www.osce.org/kosovo/13982.html

The original page of the Law (1. in albanian L., 2.Serbian L.)

1. http://www.unmikonline.org/regulations/unmikgazette/03albanian/A2000regs/RA2000_43.htm
2. http://www.unmikonline.org/regulations/unmikgazette/04serbian/SC2000regs/RSC2000_43.pdf

The UN Law in Kosovo says that the only oficele name are the names presentit in >A< every thinks als is out of Law. This is for albanian language.

RREGULLORe NR. 2000/43
UNMIK/REG/2000/43
27 korrik 2000
Mbi numrin, emrat dhe kufinjtë e komunave
-------------------------------------------
Përfaqësuesi Special i Sekretarit të Përgjithshëm,
Në pajtim me autorizimin e tij të dhënë me rezolutën 1244 (1999) të datës 10 qershor 1999 të 
Këshillit të Sigurimit të Kombeve të Bashkuara,
Duke marrë parasysh Rregulloren nr. 1999/1 të datës 25 korrik 1999, të ndryshuar, të
Misionit të Administratës së Përkohshme të Kombeve të Bashkuara në Kosovë (UNMIK)
mbi autorizimin e Administratës së 
Përkohshme në Kosovë dhe Rregulloren Nr. 1999/24 të datës 12 dhjetor 1999 të UNMIK-ut 
mbi ligjin në fuqi në Kosovë,
Me qëllim të qartësimit të numrit, emrave, shtrirja dhe kufinjve të komunave para mbajtjes 
së zgjedhjeve komunale në Kosovë,
Shpall sa vijon:
Neni 1
Numri dhe emrat e komunave
Kosova ka tridhjetë komuna ashtu siç figurojnë në Tabelën ‘A’ të kësaj rregulloreje. 
Komunikimi zyrtar nuk përmban asnjë emër për ndonjë komunë i cili nuk figuron në Tabelën ‘A’ 
të kësaj rregulloreje, përveç që në ato komuna ku komunitetet etnike a gjuhësore joshqiptare 
dhe joserbe përbëjnë një pjesë substanciale, emrat e komunave jepen edhe në gjuhët e 
atyre komuniteteve.
Neni 2
Shtrirja dhe kufinjtë e komunave
Shtrirja e çdo komune dhe kufinjtë e tyre skicohen nga zonat e tyre përbërëse kadastrale. 
Zonat kadastrale të cilat përbëjnë çdo komunë figurojnë në Tabelën ‘B’ të kësaj rregulloreje.
Neni 3
Zbatimi
Përfaqësuesi Special i Sekretarit të Përgjithshëm mund të lëshojë direktiva administrative 
në lidhje me zbatimin e kësaj rregulloreje.
Neni 4
Ligji i zbatueshëm
Kjo rregullore mbulon çdo dispozitë në ligjin e zbatueshëm e cila nuk është në përputhje me të. 
Neni 5
Hyrja në fuqi
Kjo rregullore hyn në fuqi më 27 korrik 2000.
Bernard Kouchner
Përfaqësuesi Special i Sekretarit të Përgjithshëm

The UN Law in Kosovo says that the only oficele name are the names presentit in >A< every thinks als is out of Law. This is for serbian language.

UREDBA BR. 2000/43
UNMIK/URED/2000/43
27. jul 2000. godine
O BROJU, IMENIMA I GRANICAMA OP[TINA
Specijalni predstavnik Generalnog sekretara,
Shodno ovla{}ewu koje mu je dato Rezolucijom Saveta bezbednosti Ujediwenih
nacija 1244 (1999) od 10. juna 1999. godine,
Na osnovu Uredbe br. 1999/1 od 25. jula 1999. godine Privremene
administrativne misije Ujediwenih nacija na Kosovu (UNMIK), sa izmenama i
dopunama, o ovla{}ewima Privremene uprave na Kosovu i na osnovu Uredbe
UNMIK-a br. 2000/24 od 12. decembra 2000. godine o zakonu koji je u primeni na
Kosovu, <u>(hier is oficele user)</u>
U ciqu razja{wavawa broja, imena, oblasti i granica op{tina pre odr`avawa
op{tinskih izbora na Kosovu,
Ovim objavquje slede}e:
Clan 1
BROJ I IMENA OPSTINA
1.1 Kosovo ima trideset opstina kao sto je dato u Tabeli '''A''' u dodatku ovoj
Uredbi.
1.2 Zvani~na komunikacija ne mo`e da sadrzi bilo koje ime za opstinu koje
nije naziv odredjen u Tabeli A ove Uredbe, osim u onim opstinama gde etni~ke i
jezi~ke zajednice, koje nisu srpske i albanske ~ine znatan deo stanovni{tva, gde
se imena op{tina daju i na jezicima tih zajednica.
Clan 2
PODRU^JA I GRANICE OP[TINA
Podru~je svake op{tine i wene granice su ocrtane wenim sastavnim
katastarskim zonama. Katastarske zone koje ~ine svaku op{tinu su odre|ene u
Tabeli B prilo`enoj u dodatku ovoj Uredbi.
Clan 3
PRIMENA
Specijalni predstavnik Generalnog sekretara mo`e da donese administrativno
uputstvo u vezi sa primenom ove Uredbe.
Clan 4
ZAKON KOJI JE U PRIMENI
Ova Uredba zamewuje svaku odredbu zakona koji je u primeni a koja nije saglasna
sa wom.
Clan 5
STUPAWE NA SNAGU
Ova Uredba stupa na snagu 27. jula 2000. godine.
Bernar Ku{ner
Specijalni predstavnik Generalnog sekretara

tabel of contens >A<

TABELA ‘A’ (alb) RASPORED A (ser.)
Emrat e komunave (alb.)IMENA OPSTINA (serb)
Albanski Srpski
01 Deçan \Decani
02 Gjakovë \Djakovica
03 Gllogovc \Glogovac
04 Gjilan \Gnilane
05 Dragash \Dragas
06 Istog \Istok
07 Kaçanik \Kacanik
08 Klinë\ Klina
09 Fushë Kosovë\ Kosovo Polje
10 Kamenicë \Kamenica
11 Mitrovicë \Kosovska Mitrovica
12 Leposaviq \Leposavic
13 Lipjan \Lipqan
14 Novobërdë \Novo Brdo
15 Obiliq \Obilic
16 Rahovec\ Orahovac
17 Pejë\ Pec
18 Podujevë\ Podujevo
19 Prishtinë \Pristina
20 Prizren \Prizren
21 Skenderaj\ Srbica
22 Shtime\ Stimqe
23 Shtërpcë\ Strpce
24 Suharekë\ Suva Reka
25 Ferizaj \Urosevac
26 Viti \Vitina
27 Vushtrri\ Vucitrn
28 Zubin Potok \Zubin Potok
29 Zveçan\ Zvecan
30 Malishevë\ Malisevo

If sambody have a argument Im waitting. In another cases you are going to interpret the dokumets (you are out of UN Law) and you dont have argumet, you dont work for Wikipedia but are destroing the Wikipedia image. I know that my english is not so gut, but a desinformation is not gut for Wikipedia and for the peopel in Kosovo. You can have a problem with "Haage". This tabel is speeken better then I.--Hipi Zhdripi 21:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I completley agree with you. PEJA is the real name of the city. "pec" is a basterdized version when serbia occupied Kosovo than known as (DARDANIA) they made changes to all cities in Kosovo. I will post the history of the name PEJA and why it is called that soon. I am sick of people making ridiculous changes to the page, that are STRICTLY based on Serbian propaganda books. There is no mention of ILLYRIA, no mention of Dardania, No mention of the League of Peja. Nothing it is all Serbian propaganda history. Stop treating this page as if it was a serbian propagands site and provide people with some real information not what you like and dont like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeYonka (talk • contribs) 18:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No argumet!!! please dont inteprete the documents

Sombody have putit this Kosovo place in Serbia stub or category or template here with out argumet. We dont have a argumet that Kosovo is part of S/M. We have tha Constitution of this countrie but we have the rez. 1244 wich is more importen for the Wikipedia and is saying that Kosovo it is a part of Yougoslavia and is prototoriat of UN. Till we dont have a clearly argument from UN, aricel about Kosovo must be out of this stub or category or template. Pleas dont make the discution with intepretation or the Law wich are not accordin to 1244. Everybodoy can do that but that is nothing for Wikipedia.--Hipi Zhdripi 05:06, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually 1244 does not anywhere say that Kosova is part of Serbia. Kosova was NEVER part of Serbia it was part of Yugoslavia. If you read Resolution 1244 nowhere does it even mention the word Serbia. Kosova is, was and always will be Albanian. And it is finally FREE.

PEJA is the real name of the city. "Pec" is fabricated. It was always called PEJA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.248.193 (talk • contribs) 22:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)Who is the legal successor of Jugoslavija? Oh that's right, it's Serbia. Kosovo is Serbia under resolution 1244. No legal scholar on this planet will say otherwise.[reply]

Asterion: Stop treating this page as your private homepage! This is a NPOV version. Stop reverting the whole time! I didn’t move or delete anything. I corrected some things and I was just trying to make a NPOV version of the article. You can not use just the Serbian names, because both of them, the Albanian and the Serbian name for the city are official. Take a look at the documents, which as I can see in the discussion page, are also shown here by another user here.

It is not NPOV to use just the Serbian name here. And you can not use Peć because as I said before (look at the history) the letter "ć" is not an English letter. Stop accusing me. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia and everyone can edit the articles. You didn’t even gave a reason for your revert; just putting an accusation in the summary, doesn’t give you the right to revert the truth. Show little more respect for other users here. --Mig11 09:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Few comments:

• Side note: although English alphabet actually doesn't have diacritics, foreign names in (any kind of) Latin alphabet, (if not historically accepted differently, like Vienna) are written using native diacritics, if technically possible (See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics)). With Unicode, that's not the problem on Wikipedia anymore; check e.g. French articles and you'll see the diacritics carefully preserved. So, both Serbian and Albanian diacritics (as in ë) should be preserved. Thus, there's no reason to quarrel about that.
• Now, more serious: the naming of Kosovo cities' articles is obviously an issue among Kosovar and Serbian editors. Although (was it Ilir or you?) briefly a "dual" version was in circulation ("Peja/Peć"), I think it's simply ugly. For the time being, I suggest simply avoiding references to the city name throughout the text (e.g. instead of "Peja/Peć" write just "the city"), and if it's inavoidable, use dual version. I'll try to edit the article to see what I mean.

Duja 15:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Estavisti, while it certainly was and remains a factor, it is not relevant to this article. We have plenty of background information in articles on the History of Kosovo, Kosovo War and 2004 unrest in Kosovo already, including religious differences. Please don't drag them into here. -- int19h 13:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the inclusion or exclusion of this word in the text of the article so important? At the same time, is it relevant to the subject of the article? -- int19h 09:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*sigh* I'm afraid that this & this is why. - Evv 19:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added data from the 1961 Census. If you guys have other census then please add them. -LAz17, July 8, 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by LAz17 (talk • contribs) 03:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Population Census data updated. (LAz17 (talk) 19:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)).[reply]

I will pu the official name on brackets"()"--Bindicapriqi (talk) 15:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WHO EVER IS PUTTING FALSE INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE - STOP! why didn't you include anything about ILLYRIA this information is strictly based on Serbian propaganda books and histroy. Please look at other sources and find the TURTH.

Again the name of this city is PEJA. "pec" is a basterdized version of the name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.248.193 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, The Truth... including the city's true name.
Please familiarize yourself with our naming conventions. For the specific issue of article naming, the English-language Wikipedia follows the common usage of reliable English-language publications, not true names. - Best regards, Ev (talk) 11:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peja soounds more English than Pec as the letter "c" the serbian way does not exist in the English alphabet. PEJA includes 4 letters that are present in the Enlglish alphabet. Also this article is VERY bias, who is the administrator for it and the one who keeps using it as a personal opinion? I would like to send a complaint at least include both sides Albanian and serbian not just Serbian!! You completley ignore the fact of the ILLYRIAN ERA and as well as the hesitation to mention anything about DARDANIA. I would also like to ask, who made you (Ev) the administrator of "everything" kosovar information on wiki???? All in all the Republic of Kosova is now independent and the first official language in Kosovo is Albanian and the second is Serbian. so since you are pretending to be fair, Albanian comes first.Al—Preceding PeYonka comment added by 99.245.248.193 (talk) 04:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PeYonka, please take the time to read carefully our general naming conventions and the specific ones for geographic names. They explain that we should restrict ourselves to merely reflecting common English usage: we simply adopt the names used by most English-language publications. They explain that diacritics such as the acute accent in the ć character are allowed in the English-language Wikipedia. After all, the English language is written using standard Latin characters, the very ones for which diacritics are intended.

We do not use the names that "sound more English" (a very subjective criterion in any case), nor do we eliminate all diacritics in all instances. — Morover, for the specific purpose of article naming, the languages and usages of Albanians, Serbs and Chinese are simply irrelevant. We do not use "local names", "official names", "historical names", "real names" or "true names"... instead, we use the names the majority of English-language publications use.

In the case of this city, for a number of historical reasons the vast majority of English-language publications have been using the name Peć (with or without diacritics) for many decades now. In accordance to its naming conventions, the English-language Wikipedia merely follows this common English usage.

Of course, Kosovo's declaration of independence may induce a change in English usage. If at some future moment the Albanian form Peja replaces the Serbo-Croatian Peć as the preferred usage of most English-language publications, we will rename this article accordingly. But not before.

One final thing, but a very important one: do not copy-and-paste copyrighted material to Wikipedia. Do not add content to Wikipedia if you think that doing so may be a copyright violation. I have reverted your edits. Again, I ask you to read carefully the above mentioned policies... and the one on writting from a neutral point of view. - Best regards, Ev (talk) 18:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ev, ok I must admit I am overreacting. I guess it does make sense in the whole "name" situation. I am new here and I did not know that you cannot copy paste historical facts. However, you ignored my last point about the article on peja being very bias indeed. You as an administrator should look at other World-known facts about the city of peja not only information you get from Serbian history or Slavic. You can refer to English, French, Italian, German, etc.. references because currently the only references i see are Serbian that make up the article.

How can you possibly write an article about a Kosovar city based solely on Serbian history? Perhaps, reading Noel Malcolm's - Kosovo: A short history (which cannot possibly be biased seeing as he had done extensive research on the Balkans) will lead you in the right direction. Now you amy say I am being bias by not accepting the article, but the fact is there is NOTHING on this article that sheds light on any historical fact that includes the Albanians in Kosovo.

Since I am new I still do not know how to properly use wikipedia, but when I learn I will definetly truly cite articles that include FACTS and not one sided arguments. Hope you reply, PeYonka (talk) 03:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you're new to Wikipedia, PeYonka, and yet unfamiliar with how the English-language Wikipedia works. For that very reason I ignored the issue of article content before: I wanted to emphasize first what our naming conventions are and the importance of avoiding copyright violations. — To learn about the nature and functions of Wikipedia administrators, you can do no better than read the administrator policy. :-)

About the references used in the article, the current version still lacks the very basic ones... and it is tagged accordingly with an indication that it "needs additional citations for verification." — In fact, it has only two references, none of which is Serbian: the World Gazetteer & Time (a US magazine). And some statistical data from the OSCE - which isn't Serbian either.

You're right that the current history section does not mention the Albanians until the very last paragraph. There's absolutely no problem to adding more information, be it about Albanians, Serbs, Turks, Roma or any other group, as long as it is properly sourced. — The text that you had copied from this website made only one mention of Albanians, namely the presence of "Albanian feudal lords" building Dukagjin-style towers during the Ottoman period. If we could find a reliable source with which to back that assertion, we could include it to the article. - Regards, Ev (talk) 21:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction:). - PeYonka (talk) 02:43, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged this article as an article professing a certain POV with its insistence on using the Serbian (including specific diacritics which don't exist in English) for the name of the city of Peja/Pec. I am not convinced that the name "Pec" is "common usage English" as there is no evidence whatsoever provided to backup that claim. Please do not remove the tag unless you provide some evidence that this is common usage in English. --alchaemia (talk) 04:42, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alchaemia, this is ridiculous. The fact that "Peć" (with or without the acute accent) is the common English usage for this place should be evident to anyone who has read English-language books, newspaper articles & publications on the Balkans in general or Kosovo in particular. - In the following, emphasis is always mine:

Tim Judah mentions this fact in his 2000 book The Serbs: History, Myth, and the Destruction of Yugoslavia (p. xv-xvi): "In the wake of the war in Kosovo, those writing about it have had to face the choice of using either the Serbian or Albanian names for places there. I have decided to stick with the Serbian ones because this is a book about the Serbs, and in general, news reports and maps continue to use the Serbian names. Not using Albanian names, nor calling the region Kosova, its Albanian name has no political implication whatsoever."

The English-language Wikipedia, with its policy of using the names "the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize", and doing so by following common English usage, could make Judah's words its own. :-)

And again in his 2002 book Kosovo: War and Revenge (p. xix): "I have used the Serbian [names] because, for the moment, people outside Kosovo are still more familiar with names like Pec and Djakovica rather than Peja and Gjakova".

Human Rights Watch published in 2001 the book Under Orders: War Crimes in Kosovo, which mentions the issue of "names and terminology" (p. xxiii): "For the sake of clarity and consistency, Human Rights Watch provides both the Serbian and the Albanian name at first mention of any location. Subsequent references are in the Serbian language only, since this is the English language practice (for example, Pristina and not Prishtina)."

Paul Hockenos mentions in his 2003 book Homeland Calling: Exile Patriotism & the Balkan Wars (p. xiii): "When writing about Kosovo I have chosen to use Serbian names rather than Albanian simply because they are more widely known and tend to be used on most (non-Albanian) maps."

As a sidenote, Thomas Schmid mentions the same thing in regard to the German language in his 1999 book Krieg im Kosovo (p. 14): "Im Buch wird in der Regel die serbische Schreibweise statt der albanischen verwendet: Priština statt Prishtina, Peć statt Peja und Kosovo statt Kosova. Daher steht keine Absicht. Es ist nur eine Konzession an den Umstand, daß die serbische Schreibweise der Leserschaft wohl eher vertraut und geläufing ist."

I have therefore removed the neutrality tag. Please, do not bring this issue again without providing evidence that this clearly attested common English usage has changed.

By the way, that "diacritics [...] don't exist in English" is only your personal opinion. The English language uses the very same Latin characters for which diacritics are intended. English words may seldom (if ever) have diacritics, but English-language publications -especially high-quality ones- routinely use them when rendering words and names from other languages that have diacritics (see Britannica's article on Peć). – Please, see the "Modified letters" section of the naming conventions (use English). - Regards, Ev (talk) 18:35, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced that 2-3 history books constitute "common English usage." On the other hand, every international institution in Kosovo, when writing in English, uses the form Albanian Name/Serbian Name when writing names of towns o municipalities (the same convention is used when writing the names of villages, etc). That law can be seen here [1]. I'd be willing to bet you that UNMIK/EU/OSCE/UNDP/UN/Other NGOs have created far more documentation in English with that formula than has Tim Judah ever written, read, or heard about in his life. So, what's common usage here: thousands of separate documents from all these international organizations whose primary language is English, or Tim Judah's books? The neutrality tag is up, and please don't remove it until you prove otherwise. --alchaemia (talk) 18:47, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, Alchaemia, that is not how it works. Please, read carefully our general naming conventions and the specific ones for geographic names and on using English. — Furthermore, "common English usage" is not a mathematical summatory of how many sheets of paper carry one name or another... but a general estimation of which name would most anglophones find when reading a book, a newspaper, or watching TV.

I have not given you 2-3 books that use "Peć", but books that clearly state that Serbian names in general (and even "Peć" in particular) are the ones commonly used in English-language publications, and the ones "the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize" (the core criterion of our naming conventions). — It is up to you to prove that this clearly attested common English usage has changed since then to anything other than "Peć".

If you consider that according to our naming conventions the title of this article should be changed to anything different from "Peć", please follow proper move request procedures (if you have any doubt on how to do it, I will help you). If the community agrees with your proposal, the title will be changed. — But do not re-add tags to the article based on your misinterpretation of our naming conventions. - Ev (talk) 19:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the POV tags again, as I consider this article to push the Serbian POV. I have read the naming conventions rule, and based on that rule I say that you have not provided enough evidence to support your claim that the word "Pec" (with the diacritics) is "common English usage." I don't need to "prove" anything other than the fact that several large multinational organizations, including, but not limited to, UNMIK/UN/KFOR/NATO/OSCE/UNDP/USAID/etc., use the convention Peja/Pec in the thousands of documents they have produced, all in English. Their convention has been adopted by several different organizations when dealing with the question of names and their usage; ICG is one example, or EULEX, or ICO. So, I say to you, what is common usage: what Tim Judah says is common usage, or what can be verified to be as such by reading one of the countless documents produced by these venerable organizations? Do not remove the tags. You have not convinced me that this article is not, in fact, POV. --alchaemia (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alchaemia, you are confusing the cumbersome dual usage of certain organizations whose involvement in diplomacy requires them to display special levels of "neutrality", with the general usage commonly found in English-language books, newspapers, TV & publications... the usage "the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize"... the one that we should follow.

Please, read carefully the "Widely accepted name" section of our naming conventions for geographic names. – Simply re-read the book quotes above, go to a book store, review English-language newspapers, atlases & encyclopedias, and see what name do they use for this place (you may want to start by checking Britannica, Encarta & Columbia at Bartleby.com).

By the way, our current Neutral Point of View policy states quite specifically that double or "segmented" article names, in the form of Peć/Peja or Peć (Peja), are disfavored as means of settling POV disputes among Wikipedia contributors.

In any case, I don't need to convince you. You are the one that has to convice the Wikipedia community that this article should be titled anything other than "Peć" (and do so by following proper move request procedures). That is how we solve naming issues here, not by adding tags. - You don't need to trust me. You can ask others for clarifications, for example at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions. - Regards, Ev (talk) 18:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, again I am forced to intervene. My friend, EV Kosovo is de facto run by Albanians who cares what history books say, the fact is the Albanian name should be used (with the Serbian one in brackets) as is the case with the Kosovo article. This is needed in order to maintain consistency. Besides the etymology is Albanian, PEC in Albanian is a child's way of saying penis, so don't take the Wikipedia community for morons, this is obviously a Serb construct which has no bearing on the history of the area or indeed the current state of affairs. Interestedinfairness (talk) 21:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interestedinfairness, the place names used in our articles are decided in accoradence to our general naming conventions and the specific ones for geographic names. Their main criterion is that we "should prefer [the names] the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize".

So, for the purposes of Wikipedia, the exact opposite of what you say is the case: who runs Kosovo is mostly irrelevant; instead, the names used in English-language publications is all we should care about (especially books that directly address the naming question, in terms of familiarity to English-speaking readers – cf. Widely accepted name).

We aim at being consistent with the current usages of the English language itself, and with nothing else. Furthermore, the etymology of the names is absolutely irrelevant.

Political or diplomatic considerations have no bearing on what names we use. Our Neutral point of view policy is clear on this: it's "Article naming" section currently states that "[w]here proper nouns such as names are concerned, disputes may arise over whether a particular name should be used. Wikipedia takes a descriptive rather than prescriptive approach in such cases, by using the common English language name as found in verifiable reliable sources."

Remember: Wikipedia aims to be an English-language encyclopedia, not an excercise in diplomatic lingo (as the UN, foreign ministeries & similar institutions are by their very nature). - Best, Ev (talk) 15:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I note that in the 1888 Encyclopedia Britannica at p.211 the article about this town is under the title "Ipek" indicating Slavonic Petcha, Albanian Peja and Latin Pescium. I agree that the names used should be English names where they exist, most commonly used names in English where there is not a uniquely English name. I note that before 1912 both Peja and Ipek were in use in English for the name of the town. After 1912 until 1980 both Peja and Pec as well as Pech were used. From about 1980 to the late 1990s Pec was predominately used in English. Never was Peć (with the accent) the predominate English term. Since 2000 the form Peja has again started to be used more in English language publications. --Bejnar (talk) 22:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took the advice above and looked at the current Encyclopedia Britannica article and found that it was under the form: Pejë, an uncommon in English form, but apparently favored by the OSCE. --Bejnar (talk) 22:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fairly new. A few months ago the Britannica article was under Peć (not Pec). – In any case, the choice between the forms Pec (more used) & Peć (used by some high quality sources, like the National Geograpgic Magazine & Britannica before) is the always touchy issue of diacritics. :-) Best, Ev (talk) 16:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Page now shifted to correct name according to majority population, WP naming and English usage. Lover Of Democracy (talk) 08:44, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article uses both, we need to be clear and consistent. IJA (talk) 19:13, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Those are synonymous... --Tadija (talk) 19:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From Town article: "Usually, a "town" is thought of as larger than a village but smaller than a "city" ...". kedadial 19:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ian, it is a city, one of the seven cities of Kosovo, the rest (around 25 AFAIK) are towns. kedadial 19:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers I've update the article to be consistent. IJA (talk) 00:35, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peć → Pejë – Per WP:CommonName. It is the official name in the Republic of Kosovo, most of the world recognizes Kosovo, it has an overwhelming Albanian majority and the majority of English languages sources prefer Pejë over Peć. The continuation of Peć is considered an insult to the majority of the town folk.

Over 3 million for Pejë v only 37,000 for Pec. Let's keep it neutral (talk) 11:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong support. Per nomination. Let's keep it neutral (talk) 11:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong support. --PjeterPeter (talk) 13:48, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, per WP:COMMONNAME. It is also the official name. bobrayner (talk) 21:46, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong oppose – The links provided by the nominator are deeply flawed and don't correspond to the nominator's claim at all (Peć→61,600,000 results; Peje→602,000), "people don't like it" isn't an argument, and official name + partial recognition is a logical fallacy as it doesn't translate to the town's name. Furthermore, the assertion that the majority of English language sources prefer Peje is a downright lie, as can be see by the very links that the nominator has provided (although I'm sure the users who have sounded their support are happy to have the article name changed regardless of evidence or the sloppy evidence collection that "Let's keep it neutral" has demonstrated above.) 23 editor (talk) 23:54, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong oppose –Link are completly wrong, here below are normal true results. So proposed is not most obvious name.

About 4,000,000 results Pejë

About 57,200,000 results Peć

So not, oppose. I also have a question. This move is wrong, its placed wrong, so its opened since July. Will someone see it like this? Someone should be fixed- --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 22:20, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]