Talk:Kosovo

Actually it is not a country - it is just a part of Yugoslavian confederacy.
 * Kosovo is a country, it declared its independence a few days ago.--Dmol 08:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Just let both sides be represented. Bogorm 20:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Requests for verification - kept
Kept. See archived discussion of June 2008. 18:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Mentioning Albanians
I think it's imperative to mention that the region is mostly populated by Albanians now. No? --Vahagn Petrosyan 18:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It's playing devil's advocate, as sooner or later someone will likely add "but was populated mostly with Serbs/Slavs X years ago". But I agree that the overwhelming Albanian population is worth mentioning. --Ivan Štambuk 18:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I added about Albanians because 1) it's true 2) all my English dictionaries do 3) the name of the country Kosovo does not hint who lives there. Hopefully no one will remove the information because he doesn't like it. And yes, Bogorm's ears are burning :) --Vahagn Petrosyan 18:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Vahagn, why do you insist on prædominantly Albanian population? I had removed this superfluous information, because there is w:Demographics of Kosovo and because on Kerala no one adds prædominantly Malayali population, nor on Greenland prædominantly Inuit population. I supposed that the person interested in demographics may refer to w:Demographics of Kerala, w:Demographics of Kosovo or w:Demographics of Greenland for this kind of information. Why do you consider this information about the population indispensable? Would you settle for linking the demographic article under the main one by means of instead of pushing the information in the definition? The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 10:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * See, Bogorm, this is exactly what I meant by saying you come here with political agenda, apart from your quality edits. You know very well that the predominant Albanian population is not one of many facts that can be withheld from the definition, say, like the number of rivers of Kosovo or it's GDP. The fact that currently Albanians live on this once Slavic land is the underlying cause of the whole conflict and the reason why the region is disputed. The clause about Albanians is not superfluous, it's the key part of the definition together with Kosovo's geographical location. You, Serbs, Azeris, Georgians, etc. must understand that by concealing texts you don't like, changing maps or wringing out resolutions from UN worth less than a toilet paper will not change the painful reality: this is an Albanian state and we have to mention that. If you are worried about superfluous information distracting the user, better remove the second definition about Serbia's imaginary administrative divison about which no one really cares. Finally, see how various English dictionaries mention Albanians one way or another in the definition of Kosovo (I hope you won't consider them a mouthpiece of Western imperialistic propaganda):

"an autonomous province of Serbia; capital, Priština. It borders on Albania and the majority of the people are of Albanian descent. In 1998 Kosovo was attacked by Serbian forces intent on expelling the Albanian population; the aggression was halted by NATO bombing in 1999, and Kosovo was put under UN administration" Oxford Dictionary of English, 2005:

"an autonomous province of Serbia and Montenegro, in SW Serbia: chiefly Albanian in population since the 13th century, it declared independence in 1990; Serb suppression of separatists escalated to a policy of ethnic cleansing in 1998, provoking NATO airstrikes against Serbia in 1999: now under UN administration: mainly a plateau. Capital: Priština. Pop.: 2 325 000 (2001 est.). Area: 10 887 sq. km (4203 sq. miles) Full name: Kosovo-Metohija" Collins English Dictionary. 8th Edition. 2006 :

"an autonomous province of Serbia; capital, Priština. It borders on Albania and the majority of the people are of Albanian descent" New Oxford American Dictionary, 2nd Edition, 2005

"a territory between Serbia and Albania. Population: 2,126,708 (2007). It used to be an autonomous area within Serbia until Slobodan Milosevic, the President of Serbia, stopped this in 1989. In the 1990s the Albanian Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) was established in order to achieve independence for Kosovo. In 1998 the Serbs killed many Albanians in Kosovo in a process known as ethnic cleansing. This continued until 1999 when NATO bombed Serbian targets. Kosovo declared itself independent from Serbia in 2008." Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English 5th Ed.

"A republic of the western Balkan Peninsula. Settled by Slavs around 600, the area was under Turkish rule from 1389 to 1913 and became part of Yugoslavia after World War I. An autonomous region of Serbia after 1946, Kosovo lost much of its autonomy in 1990, leading to ethnic violence between Kosovo's Albanian and Serb populations. Intervention by NATO and the United Nations reestablished peace in 1999. In 2008, Kosovo declared independence; however, its sovereignty was not universally recognized at that time. Priština is the capital and largest city. Population: 2,200,000." American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition


 * The last quoted definition is undoubtedly sheer propaganda/POV (first 5 words), but Vahagn, the last thing I expected to hear from you was a juxtaposition of Serbs and Azeris... the second definition about Serbia's imaginary administrative divison about which no one really cares, so you consider the Serbian rule irrevocably part of the history, which ought to be put up with. I do not know what your thoughts are on Western Armenia, but this used to be an Orthodox land, Karskaja oblast' was free and liberated in the period 1878-1920 and if you intend to dismiss this period of history as having little connection to the præsent, this is/would be your right, but I, being no Armenian, cherish the historical justice and right which were victorious during the period 1878-1918(the deplorable Treaty of Brest-Litovsk), but later stumbled upon, and so I empathise with the quæst for justice and am consternated by the atrocities purpetrated against the Serbian/Armenian population of Kosovo and Metohija/Karskaja oblast' in order to depopulate and consequently engulf those ancient pillars of Orthodox civilisation and I have never doubted that many Armenians care about their lost lands, but I really did not expect indifference towards the ordeal of other people in a similar situation. If this is the status quo, fine, you have it in the article and I am not going to contest here the stress which you bestowed thereupon (prædominantly Albanian, Ivan's edit: most->a number of, when 150 out of 200 corresponds pretty well to the idea of most), but I am going to adhere to and revere the righteousness as hitherto. I only plead for the replacement of a number of with some, for meseems that the proportion ca.50/ca.200=ca.1/4 is nearer to some than to a number of. And I have no political agenda here, as I am no Serb, I only have my Slavic and Orthodox consciousness and cannot relinquish them. The following words may have been uttered by a person whom I deeply dislike, but they are epitomic of my situation among the inexorable opposition: Ich stehe hier. Ich kann nicht anders. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 15:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


 * 22 out of 27 EU members, 24 out of 28 NATO members, all the bordering states except Serbia...pretty much everyone relevant recognized it. Pure numbers in global terms can be misleading, it's not how many states, but how many of relevant states recognized Republic of Kosova. They're not just some states - they're the states. As far as the Free World is concerned, Republic of Kosova is an internationally recognized country.  --Ivan Štambuk 18:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Bogorm, I do sympathize with Serbs (despite the Nagorno-Karabakh situation) and wish Albanians got into a spaceship and flew away to Pluto, but our sympathy does not give us a right to turn a blind eye to truths we don't like. Likewise, I will mention that Western Armenia is now a part of Turkey inhabited by Kurds and Turks when I write that article. As for changing "a number of" to "some", I see no problem in the change. If I understood correctly you meant "a number of" in the sentence "considered a part of Serbia by Serbian government (under the name of Kosovo i Metohija) and a number of other countries", right? And one small thing: as far as I have examined the matter, the Oriental Orthodoxy of Armenians is different from Eastern Orthodoxy. Those two together with Catholicism are rather three vertices of a triangle. --Vahagn Petrosyan 18:37, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops, I must have made a blunder with my last plea, so I am retracting it. I thought a number of is referring to those countries which Ivan extols as relevant, whilst in fact it describes the 150 resisting countries. In this case I find this version inspirational and must have pleaded for most in lieu of a number of (since 150 out of 200 pretty much corresponds to the idea of most), but I would rather neither initiate nor beseech the replacement of a number of with most, however unabatedly I profess the necessity for such a change, since I do not hope for it to be heeded nor fulfilled. Однако, Vahagn, я рад, что мы разделяем общее мнение о Косово. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 06:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)