Talk:Kosovo

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kosovo article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 17, 2015, February 17, 2016, February 17, 2017, February 17, 2018, and February 17, 2019.

Kosovo Top‑importance

	Kosovo 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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Albania Top‑importance

	Kosovo 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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Serbia Top‑importance

	Serbia portal 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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries 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.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry articles

WikiProject Countries to-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Check out the article alerts; see if anything catches your fancy.
Cleanup : clean-up listing for Countries
Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stubs by region.
Other : add {{WPCountries}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess.

Europe

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Limited recognition High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Limited recognition, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the coverage of entities with limited recognition on Wikipedia by contributing to articles relating to unrecognized states and separatist movements. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join our WikiProject by signing your name at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.Limited recognitionWikipedia:WikiProject Limited recognitionTemplate:WikiProject Limited recognitionLimited recognition articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

In accordance with sanctions authorised for this article:

All editors on this article are subject to 1RR per day and are required to discuss any content reversions on the article talk page. For full details, see [1] (subsequently modified by [2]).

Useful information for this article

Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette.
This is not a forum for general discussion of Kosovo, or whether it is a 'country', 'state' or 'province'. Any such messages will be deleted. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article.
You may wish to ask factual questions about Kosovo at the Reference desk, discuss relevant Wikipedia policy at the Village pump, or ask for help at the Help desk.
The opening paragraph to the article was decided upon, by consensus, following lengthy discussions. It is based on reliable sources, providing a neutral point of view. The first sentence, in particular, must call Kosovo a "country", reflecting the consensus found in the RfC held in the spring of 2023.
This article is written in British English, which differs from American English in some ways. See American and British English differences.
According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Kosovo received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

RfC in Terminology to Reflect the Albanian Language

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

I'm taking the step as a bot-summoned respondent to procedurally close this discussion temporarily, pending necessary first steps in discussion and necessary changes in approach that will need to take place for the discussion to proceed. Unfortunately, I think to leave the discussion up in it's current format would only pull more and more volunteers into a confusing procedural loggerhead, and a lot of non-productive corss-talk arising out of issues with how the RfC has been initially approached. Since this I am temporary shutting down the RfC with this action, I will provide a fulsome account of my reasoning:

To begin with, there is an WP:RFCBEFORE issue here. I think that element of the RFC procedure gets tossed around very arbitrarily and problematically in recent years, bureaucratically stalling useful RfCs for little practical reason. The issue has gotten to the point where literally almost every RfC will have someone invoke RFCBEFORE to try to shut down the discussion, whether it is a valid objection or not. Nevertheless, in this case, I think it is justified. There's no previous talk page discussion on this issue as far as I can tell, and while linguistic disputes on articles which touch upon ethnically controversial issues can generally be expected to need broader community involvement to resolve eventually, in this case (since there are other reasons to pause and/or restart the RfC), it makes sense to take a pause to have some initial discussion.

Secondly, the RfC prompt is in no way neutral, rather arguing very strongly for the OP's interpretation of the editorial issue, in flagrant violation of WP:RFCNEUTRAL. The reality is that IJA is correct that neither the Serbian nor Albanian terms are per se the terms we would use in an encyclopedic context / in Wikivoice. What matters is what the most commonly utilized (and thus most easy to identify) common nouns would be, for an English-speaking readership. The purpose of an en.Wikipedia article is to educate an English-speaking reader on the articles subject, using the most accessible language and terminology possible--not to validate the linguistic preferences of one group over another, whatever the numbers involved. Numerous policies converge on this principle of neutrality--see, for example, WP:ENGLISH, WP:CRITERIA, and WP:COMMONNAME-- and the OP may wish not to proceed with this discussion once aware of those policies. However, even if the OP is not convinced after discussing those policies and still wants to have an RfC involving community third parties, the RFCNEUTRAL issue remains, and the opening prompt will need to be reworked into very different wording. No minor tweaks to keep the RfC open would suffice in this case. Arguments for one approach over another should be saved for individual !votes.

Lastly, meaning no disrespect to the two respondents who suggested this matter needs to be handled through an RM request, but that is not in fact the correct course of action to resolve the OP's inquiry. Even if there were agreement to relocate the two relevant articles for the mountain ranges themselves, as well as any other landmarks that might get referenced in this article, that doesn't really directly impact the WP:LOCALCONSENSUS issue that the OP is raising, concerning this article. The articles for those landmarks could be located at namespaces that reflect the common Serbian toponyms, the Albanian variants, or a third option altogether, and none of those options would directly mandate that we use the same term in the context of this article, and the OP's inquiry would still stand as needing addressing.

TLDR: Discussion paused and RfC tag removed, pending a determination that an RfC is necessary; if the OP wishes to proceed with a second go at the RfC after said discussion, a new and more neutral prompt must be developed for the second listing. SnowRise ^{let's rap} 23:09, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This RfC proposes to change references in the article from Serbian terms such as "Metohija" and "Šar Mountains" to their Albanian equivalents, "Dukagjin" and "Sharr Mountains", respectively. The article currently utilizes Serbian terminology that may not reflect the linguistic preferences of the majority of Kosovo's citizens, who predominantly speak Albanian. Over 90% of the population in Kosovo identifies as Albanian, making it imperative that the language used in the article accurately represents the voices and perspectives of the majority of its people.

Using terms that resonate with the local population aligns with Wikipedia's neutral point of view (NPOV) policy. The NPOV guideline emphasizes that articles should represent significant viewpoints fairly and proportionately. Since the Albanian language is the primary language spoken by the majority in Kosovo, adopting Albanian terminology helps to present an accurate portrayal of the region’s cultural and linguistic identity.

In conclusion, I propose to change the following terms in the article:

Metohija → Dukagjin
Šar Mountains → Sharr Mountains. Iaof2017 (talk) 12:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

English Wikipedia uses the common name in the English language, not what the local population call something. Neither of them terms are the common name in the English language. IJA (talk) 16:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong venue, this needs to be taken up as WP:RMs on the specific pages. CMD (talk) 16:29, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like this RfC may have jumped the gun a little. An RfC is appropriate after discussion with involved parties on the talk page WP:RFCBEFORE. You might be able to achieve consensus without requesting additional input. Pathawi (talk) 06:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Summoned by bot) Procedural close , Start an RM and publicise accordingly. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 16:55, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Snow Rise, your closure is incorrect regarding the RMs. Per WP:UEGN, we should refer to places by their article title except when discussing historical periods. The article title does directly mandate changes in article text, and there is no local consensus for this article, which follows the global guideline. To change use on this article, the best way is a successful RM. CMD (talk) 10:59, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chipmunkdavis. That's all correct, and you may even be right that an RM would be the path of least resistance for the change the OP wants to effect (though I think not, insofar as I don't believe the variants of the toponyms they wish to introduce are the English common names, so I doubt that the RM process will avail them). Nevertheless, my point is that these are actually two separate processes, procedurally speaking. Even if the OP chooses not to attempt RMs (or attempts them and fails to gain consensus for the moves), they are still permitted to make an argument here for variances in the terminology (either along the lines of one of the considerations built into UEGN itself, or a separate IAR argument). And when we're talking about an article with as much multi-ethnic complexity and controversy as exists for this article, we can't write off the possibility of such an outcome entirely (though I still think the OP would have a very uphill climb in making that argument, which I attempted to emphasize for them in the close).

All of which is to say, a separate local consensus discussion here is not foreclosed, and this is a potentially appropriate venue for it, regardless of UEGN (or indeed, partly because of it, since it does contemplate variations over time, if nothing else) and regardless of what does or does not happen with any prospective RM. However, as I also emphasized in my close, an RfC on such a proposal should only take place after further discussion, and would need a neutral prompt if it is ultimately undertaken again. That said, your caveat contains useful information the OP should be aware of, and they should definitely read through UEGN before deciding whether to pursue their argument further. SnowRise ^{let's rap} 00:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone could try to argue IAR, but in the meantime, it is in correct as the close says that "none of those options would directly mandate that we use the same term in the context of this article", and that "the OP's inquiry would still stand as needing addressing", as if the RM was made and successful, it would unless someone wants to do an uphill climb lead to a change here, and would address the OP's inquiry. CMD (talk) 07:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2024

I propose to add that countries and organizations that have not recognized the institutions of the Republic of Kosovo often call them Provisional Institutions of Self-Government in Kosovo.^[1] Bagyblazha (talk) 14:45, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Verstichel, Annelies (2011). "A Reading of the Comprehensive Proposal for the Kosovo Status Settlement in light of the OSCE HCNM Bolzano/Bozen Recommendations on National Minorities in Inter-State Relations". In Palermo, Francesco; Sabanadze, Natalie (eds.). National Minorities in Inter-State Relations. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. p. 189. ISBN 978-90-04-17598-3.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 September 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Kosovo is a recognized nation throughout the world. It’s not partially recognized, it’s recognized by more than 50% of the all nations around the world, that’s a majority of recognition, not partial. Also recognized by America and the U.K. 75.214.233.224 (talk) 22:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. At any rate, a majority is partial. CMD (talk) 03:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

The first sentence of the subject is misleading. To make it sound less misleading it should be country with limited recognition in Southeastern Europe instead of country in Southeastern Europe with limited recognition. Stating country in Southeastern Europe with limited recognized might mislead the reader who is not familiar with the history of the area into reaching the conclusion that the subject is a country. Stating country with limited recognition in Southeastern Europe avoids that. Who agrees with my statement?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/katharinabuchholz/2023/02/17/kosovo--beyond-where-the-un-disagrees-on-recognition-infographic/ 2600:1700:36D0:9B0:D914:CEF0:F24D:5D78 (talk) 18:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand your statement enough to agree one way or another, a country with limited recognition is still a country. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:22, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is still a country. My question was about the first sentence of the subject. It makes more sense to write the end of the sentence as country with limited recognition in Southeastern Europe rather than country in Southeastern Europe with limited recognition. Is my question clearer? 2600:1700:36D0:9B0:6493:D35:2CE8:6F77 (talk) 23:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 November 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

please change formatting of capital (erroneous tags)

from: Pristina^a

to: Pristina Anvish (talk) 15:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: The superscript a is a footnote, not part of the name. One could make the argument that the footnotes need to be better constructed in the infobox, but that will require a separate edit request. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:18, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Verstichel, Annelies (2011). "A Reading of the Comprehensive Proposal for the Kosovo Status Settlement in light of the OSCE HCNM Bolzano/Bozen Recommendations on National Minorities in Inter-State Relations". In Palermo, Francesco; Sabanadze, Natalie (eds.). National Minorities in Inter-State Relations. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. p. 189. ISBN 978-90-04-17598-3.

[1]