Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:37, 13 March 2022

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 Misplaced Pages, 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 (subsequently modified by ).

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: Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Kosovo Top‑importance Kosovo is part of WikiProject Kosovo, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Kosovo on Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Serbia Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Misplaced Pages. 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Albania Top‑importance Kosovo is part of the WikiProject Albania, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Albania on Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Countries This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Misplaced Pages. 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 WikiProject Countries to-do list: edit history watch purge 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. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Europe 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 Misplaced Pages.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. 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 Misplaced Pages 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages'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.

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 Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

The contents of the Republic of Kosovo page were merged into Kosovo on 23 May 2014. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

Lead

The lead of this article says that Kosovo is a "partially recognized" state. The closest comparison to Kosovo is probably Taiwan/ROC, which is also a de facto state with partial recognition. Its lead simply calls it a "country" which I think is more appropriate for that article and for this one. I fail to see the point of calling it "partially recognized" in the lead despite the fact that it is even more widely recognized than Taiwan/ROC. PtolemyXV (talk) 20:37, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

I propose to change it from "partially recognised state" to "partially recognised country".94.65.254.187 (talk) 18:48, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Should probably change to country per talk Red Slash 18:54, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

• I agree that just "country" is the most appropriate, just drop "partially recognized" entirely. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:03, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The consensus on this article has consistently been to describe Kosovo as a "partially recognized state" because the term "country" does not denote statehood and/or sovereignty. Scotland, for example, is a country. It's still under British sovereignty. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 19:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

 Comment: State is far more accurate per current state of affairs. Secondly, de facto and "sovereign state" was added in the lead without any consensus and should be removed. Kosovo* is not a sovereign state and it is very much dependent on foreign political, military and financial aid, only irrational and badly informed individual would claim otherwise. God bless. Psalm 90: 1-9. Ничим неизазван (talk) 03:05, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

• I agree that de facto should be removed, Kosovo is recognized by many countries, including 97 UN members. When it is recognized by half the UN, it doesn't make sense to claim that it is only a de facto state. Folohsor (talk) 19:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

I've reverted to the "partially recognised state in Southeast Europe" wording. Further discussion is needed if this is to be changed. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:18, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Kompleksi i shtëpive të familjes Jashari ne Prekaz 10.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:52, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 March 2022

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

Introduction grammar request

Change:

… with a population of about 1.8 million; it is bordered by by the uncontested part …

To:

… with a population of about 1.8 million; it is bordered by the uncontested part … 2601:681:5680:9ED0:8CB4:4286:6ACB:D942 (talk) 16:57, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:38, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

My mistake. I was manually reinserting something that had sat unchallenged for seven years less the occasional opportunistic troll's attempt at covert disruption. I'll be more careful next time. --Edin balgarin (talk) 20:20, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

@Edin balgarin: please immediately retract your characterization of me as an "opportunistic troll" per WP:NPA. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:41, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I said "the occasional opportunistic troll" and I can see that about four people have done what I said in the passage. Nobody said your name, and I make no comment about you. What's to retract? I'll name the culprits if you want. --Edin balgarin (talk) 20:46, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I challenged it, you said that only "occasional opportunistic troll" intent on "covert disruption" had challenged it. Either you're wrong and should retract an untrue statement or thats a personal attack. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Just a minute. Are you saying this is you? I ask because this editor bowed out shortly after Horse Eye Jack was created, and you two are the only ones to ride roughshod over WP:PARITY by trying to appropriate WP:RS for a issue where RS does not apply. See this. Does writing the comment "And what's more, when did a reliable media source ever call the border "Kosovo-Serb uncontested territory". " ring any bells? --Edin balgarin (talk) 21:07, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Nope thats not me, also RS apply to everything on the page. I would imagine that all editors would attempt to apply RS when adding content to a mainspace article, they are required to do so after all. Also just to be clear thats not a troll, thats an editor in good standing... If thats who you meant thats still a personal attack. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 21:36, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

It's a troll in no finer feather: I've seen this past half an hour that he had a history going back ten years doing the same old thing, using several accounts. No RS does NOT apply everywhere and I have already explained this. I can find reliable sources that refer to Muammar Gaddafi as an "evil tyrant" with casual abandon. You think you can go adding that to his page just because about six UK broadsheets used this term about him? --Edin balgarin (talk) 21:52, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Are you saying that account is an unidentified sock? Its not tagged. WS doesn't apply everywhere (talk pages for example) but it does apply to content in mainspace articles (such as Kosovo)... We don't publish *anything* besides whats from WP:RS there. See WP:RS "Articles should be based on reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we publish only the analysis, views, and opinions of reliable authors, and not those of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves." Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:00, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

"We don't publish *anything* besides whats from WP:RS" = attacking the straw man. I never said "use unreliable sources". I already gave you an example as to how "reliable sources" refer to unfavourable world leaders as "evil tyrants" and you still haven't edited the Vladimir Putin article to call him what the "analysis, views, and opinions of reliable authors" are printing about him. I never for one moment said that account is an unidentified sock. I am saying he is an IDENT-ified sock. --Edin balgarin (talk) 22:22, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I agree you didn't say use unreliable sources, you said don't use sources *at all* aka "RS does not apply" "RS comes into play where two editors present diametrically opposing viewpoints. Where presentation is the bone of contention as is the case here, the quintessential factor is WP:PARITY." etc (WP:PARITY only comes into play when evaluating WP:FRINGE BTW). That is not a not a tagged/identified sock, see

I am sorry to have floated the suggestion that you are that person. It was not intended to cause you offence and I assure you never again to broach that topic. Just to get back to the issue of policies, note that WP:FRINGE and WP:PARITY land elsewhere on the same project page. FRINGE goes straight to the head of the article, though PARITY migrates to its specific subsection. The discussion to have taken place in 2015 explored the matter of how to deal with wording over a subject that is not only hotly disputed, but polarises the entire world almost right down the middle. Since you said you have only "dipped slightly into the Balkans" (and your edits back up your honesty), I'll tell you what the opposite is (and indeed what was once displayed on the article). Just as an overture, I'll give you the backstory: the competing factions are proponents of Kosovan separatism (we'll say Group A), and proponents of Serbian territorial integrity (say Group B). Group A argue "Kosovo borders Serbia" based on a presupposition that Kosovo should be treated as an undisputed sovereign state. Group B argue that "Kosovo borders CENTRAL Serbia" based on Serbia's claim of sovereignty over Kosovo. Uncontested territory was a type of compromise. --Edin balgarin (talk) 23:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Wouldn't they be nationalists on both sides at this point not separatists and integralists? The separation was successful after all and Kosovo is currently a sovereign state (albeit one with limited recognition). You would appear to be pushing a rather dated POV. I don't understand why you're invoking any part of WP:FRINGE at all because it doesn't seem to apply here. WP:RS applies everywhere WP:FRINGE applies and then some, such as here. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:13, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I was correct the first time. It is separatists and proponents of Serbian territorial integrity (I didn't use the term integralist). Nationalism doesn't come into the picture. When nations base their claim on irredentism then that is nationalist. Ukraine's claim on Crimea and the Donbass (and maybe now everything east of the Dnieper) is based on its constitutional outline and not on a desire to take foreign lands. When it came to separating Kosovo from Serbia and Yugoslavia, the work was done by separatists and achieved by the powerful handlers of those separatists. But whose "nationalism" is it? Albanian nationalism does not advocate for Kosovo and Albania as independent of one another. Meanwhile with regards the opposite nationalism (Serbian or Pan-Yugoslav), it should be known that being Albanian did not determine where they stood since the VJ (Army of Yugoslavia) had Kosovo Albanians among its ranks, and a certain part of the ethnic Albanian population supported the union with Serbs and Montenegrins. Then on top of that, Kosovo is home to ethnic Serbs, Montenegrins, Gorani (minor Slavic group), Bosniaks, Roma and Turks. Most Turks are said to have been separatists, and the rest are firmly against an independent Kosovo. Correct, FRINGE does not apply, and it is for that reason PARITY is essential given the near 50/50 global split. RS was explained to you here, here, and here so I am not repeating myself. You claim that I am pushing a dated POV, yet there have been no new developments between 2015 and 2022 in this ball park. Your appraisal of Kosovo being a "sovereign state" is based on some anecdotal interpretation. There are a list of states with limited recognition and nothing weeds out Kosovo from the rest of the catalogue. Transnistria declared independence from the Soviet Union before the country was officially recognised as dissolved, meaning Moldova has never exerted any leverage there. Despite this, it is not said Transnistria "borders Moldova", but rather the "the river Dniester and the Moldovan–Ukrainian border". On the Serbia article, it mentions bordering Albania by way of the disputed Kosovo breakaway. What the Kosovo article does not call its border with Albania however is the "Serbia-Albania" border. If you ask me, proponents of Kosovo independence have a damn good deal with the current arrangement. Then you have the wider list, State of Palestine, Abkhazia, Lugansk People's Republic, Western Sahara, each with their own backstories. I assure you that there is nothing special about Kosovo that should split it from the rest on the limited recognition club, regardless of whether the claimed territory is controlled in whole, in part, or no part. Furthermore, this is not the only geographical article that addresses the Kosovo-Serbia issue. There is Serbia, North Kosovo, Outline of Kosovo (where I just reverted an unchecked POV breach), and Outline of Serbia (which explains the situation well). If there are to be any radical amendments, then it needs to be distributed across dozens of articles. --Edin balgarin (talk) 11:57, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

If the nation has been established and achieved its independence then they're nationalists... Kosovo has done both. The Serbian claims are in fact irredentist, they no longer have sovereignty over Kosovo. "If you ask me, proponents of Kosovo independence have a damn good deal with the current arrangement." is exactly the sort of battleground POV pushing I have asked you to abstain from. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:32, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Kosovo is not Serbian irredentism because it has never recognised the breakaway of this region, and as such, Serbia's claim over Kosovo extends beyond nationalists to the whole of ethnic Serb society. It would be no different to me saying the LPR and the DPR are subjects of Ukrainian irredentism when in fact Ukraine still claims them as their own. When you say, Serbia "no longer has sovereignty over Kosovo", you invoke the dispute itself. What you mean is that Serbia no longer has any control over Kosovo and that is correct, much as Ukraine has no control over the LPR and the DPR (nor Crimea), and Syria does not control all of its claimed lands either. so according to your argument, Kosovo is only as sovereign as ISIS had been at times it had control of its claimed territory in whole or in part. --Coldtrack (talk) 22:10, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

If the LPR and DPR were sovereign then you would have a point, but they aren't... They're puppet states. A better analogy is Taiwan which is also sovereign yet claimed by its neighbor. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:14, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

The LRP and DPR declared independence from Ukraine, and Kosovo declared independence from Serbia. Nobody is interested in your unauthenticated appraisal of what is a "puppet state" and what you decree to be "sovereign", and while you are unable to corroborate any form of "puppetry" outside of your Russophobic mainstream media, everybody that knows Kosovo, famous for Camp Bonsteel, knows that it is nothing more than a western outstation. Its streets and squares shamefully honour contemporary US political figures in a way not even known in the US, and where the Kosovo "flag" flies, so too does the US flag. Taiwan most definitely does not compare to Kosovo in any way. Taiwan represents the Republic of China, and you have just betrayed your own ignorance as before you made the last comment, you evidently had never heard of the One China Policy, and as such, I am certain you have never heard of the Cross-Strait relations either. There are, and have been some examples on the world stage which compare to China-Taiwan (such as before 2001, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan v Islamic State of Afghanistan). Those the examples which most closely approximate to Kosovo are the LPR, DPR, Islamic State, Somaliland, Transnistria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Kosovo has no trump card over any of those I mentioned. --Coldtrack (talk) 22:32, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Just FYI the primary topic I edit is Taiwan. Except for Somaliland those are not sovereign states. Also just FYI that mainstream media is in general WP:RS, you can't dismiss them. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:39, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Two things. First, I have already read this whole thread and you've had RS explained to you three times by another editor. You don't get to appropriate this policy to violate delicate NPOV matters. That would firstly be in breach of WP:PARITY and of WP:GAME. And besides, you haven't yet shown a "reliable source" which suggests Kosovo is not disputed and that it is recognised by most of the world's states, which is the type of source you need for your proposals. Second, editing Taiwanese article ands comprehending the political situation are two different things, and you - it would appear - are supremely ignorant of the One China Policy if you think any aspect of the Kosovo situation compares with Taiwan. You say "Taiwan is claimed by its neighbour". Such a comment not only betrays ignorance on your part but is a loaded statement as well since it operates on the presupposition that its neighbour is "wrong" and that Taiwan's "sovereignty" is cut and dried. Sure the PRC (Beijing) claims Taiwan and Pingu Islands. And do they (Taiwan + islands) not also claim mainland China for themselves? --Coldtrack (talk) 22:48, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

That editor was wrong about WP:RS and has since been indeffed for disruptive editing... Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:51, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

He was correct about RS. Read his examples about loaded language which you have so far conveniently ignored. --Coldtrack (talk) 22:53, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

He was wrong about WP:RS, if you'd like to go ask about that at the help desk you may. I can't find any contemporay sources which don't treat it as the Serbia-Kosovo border for example "Serbia and Kosovo have reached an agreement to end a standoff at their shared border which was rooted in a dispute over vehicle licence plates, a European Union mediator has announced." . If you have sources which use your preferred language please present them. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:55, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

No he was correct about RS. It seems that his mistake, and mind for rushing in quickly, was citing PARITY. There is no FRINGE issue here. I believe the matter at hand that needs to be considered is WP:WEIGHT and I will point it out to him. The contemporary sources will unsparingly cite "Kosovo-Serbia border" as a consequence of their pre-existing advocacy which is to treat Kosovo as legitimate. Al Jazeera did not waste time here as within three days of the declaration of independence, they put out a report titled "Europe's Newest Country", filled with the usual vexed anti-Serbian rhetoric. To be honest, you are starting off in the wrong place if your intention is to eliminate the treatment of Kosovo as a disputed territory and instead treat it on the same level as regular countries. While dealing with disputed territories, we have to be careful over how we write about them, and the same goes for the country to dispute it: we cannot just say that Serbia borders Albania willy-nilly but there needs a mention of the surrounding case. --Coldtrack (talk) 05:58, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:NPOV we go with what the contemporary sources say, including Al Jazeera. WP:WEIGHT does not allow us to disregard the most significant view published in WP:RS like that. If you wish to establish that all of our WP:RS are unusable as a "consequence of their pre-existing advocacy which is to treat Kosovo as legitimate" then we will need to go to the Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, thats not a policy that can overridden by a local consensus. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 06:13, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

No. You have had this explained to you a gazillion times now. NPOV is about reflecting conflicting viewpoints. You need to know what RS is and is not. RS is about choosing which of two diametrically opposed claims to treat as factual (e.g. round earth, supported by science vs flat earth, supported by pseudo-science). RS is not a trump card to oust NPOV. If it were, then there would be no such policy as NPOV. So tell me, in light of Serbia's claim over Kosovo being recognised by (just over) half the globe, what is your proposal for dealing with how we present Kosovo across the project? --Coldtrack (talk) 06:37, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Area

The area of Kosovo is 10,908 km2 not 10,887 km2 68.197.20.104 (talk) 03:59, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Typo

Under the culture section, on the topic of food, one mention of Fila is misspelled as Flia. I do not have an account to fix this. 2600:8805:3002:1700:3540:F9EC:4A2E:6DE8 (talk) 17:12, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

It should be spelled Flia, according to its article. No such user (talk) 16:01, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Change to lead

@No such user: please get consensus for your desired addition to the lead per WP:BURDEN. It does not appear to be appropriate to push a dated POV in the lead and I see no closed discussions in the archives which are relevant. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:23, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

@Horse Eye's Back: - I did not add anything new to the lead recently (I did reorder two sentences, but you seem to take issue with ). It was you who removed the long-standing and neutral formulation "borders the uncontested territory of Serbia". It is POV to suggest that it "borders Serbia", disregarding that Serbia claims Kosovo as its integral part.
Consensus for "uncontested" wording was last affirmed in /Archive_30#Northern border in 2015, among a dozen involved editors, and has been present in the lead almost continuously since. The WP:ONUS is on you to demonstrate support for your version. No such user (talk) 20:58, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

WP:ONUS doesn't apply here, onus is "While information must be verifiable for inclusion in an article, not all verifiable information must be included. Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article. Such information should be omitted or presented instead in a different article. The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content." Horse Eye's Back (talk) 21:07, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Also there is no clear consensus in that link, the conversation ends without consensus ever being achieved. A number of editors seem to have made significant errors, such as treating countries as WP:RS... WP:NEUTRAL has nothing to do with the opinions of countries. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 21:11, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

In that case, change it to what it originally said, Kosovo borders Central Serbia. Problem solved. --Coldtrack (talk) 22:12, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Central Serbia is not a country, what we are trying to do here is list the bordering countries not parts of those countries. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:15, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

And the majority of countries in the world say that Kosovo is not a country either. So where do we go from here? --Coldtrack (talk) 22:16, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

What does that have to do with anything? Countries aren't WP:RS, their opinions don't matter to us here at wikipedia. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:19, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Since you like Wikilawyering, WP:TALKDONTREVERT states that If an edit is challenged, or is likely to be challenged, editors should use talk pages to explain why an addition, change, or removal improves the article, and hence the encyclopedia. Consensus can be assumed if no editors object to a change. I did object to your change, pointing you to a rather explicit previous consensus (despite your handwaving to the contrary), and you failed to explain why you think your removal improves the article. Now, what's your substantial point? No such user (talk) 22:14, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Please withdraw the accusation of wikilawyering, pointing our a basic mistake is not wikilawyering. Multiple editors have objected to the change, there is no explicit consensus... One of the involved even says "I won't call it consensus yet." Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:19, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

No cookie for you. I asked, "what's your substantial point" and you continued wikilayering. At this point, I must conclude you have no substantial point. No such user (talk) 22:22, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

You know what my substantial point is... that "the uncontested part of the territory of" has no place in the lead. Also again unfounded accusation of wikilawyering may be treated as WP:PA. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:24, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Your proposed "Kosovo borders Serbia" wording implies that Kosovo is not a part of Serbia, a proposition that half the world disputes. How is that compatible with WP:NPOV? No such user (talk) 22:30, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

NPOV is about reliable sources, it has nothing to do with how many people believe something. "All encyclopedic content on Misplaced Pages must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Why would half of the world disputing it matter here on wikipedia? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:33, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class Kosovo articles
• Top-importance Kosovo articles
• WikiProject Kosovo articles
• B-Class Serbia articles
• Top-importance Serbia articles
• WikiProject Serbia articles
• B-Class Albania articles
• Top-importance Albania articles
• WikiProject Albania articles
• B-Class country articles
• WikiProject Countries articles
• B-Class Europe articles
• Unknown-importance Europe articles
• WikiProject Europe articles
• WikiProject templates with unknown parameters
• B-Class Limited recognition articles
• High-importance Limited recognition articles
• WikiProject Limited recognition articles
• Selected anniversaries (February 2015)
• Selected anniversaries (February 2016)
• Selected anniversaries (February 2017)
• Selected anniversaries (February 2018)
• Selected anniversaries (February 2019)