Well I might consider and then might even agree with you that perhaps one could point me to WP DBAD here spelled in a form of euphemism for my potential benefit as I consider you had pointed me but that still hasn t given any solutions to the disagreement which goes on the talk page here I mean the Talk International recognition of Kosovo page As far as the WP RM if this is what you had in mind is concerned my opinion is that the third conversator thinks other of the procedure I m still not sure that there is one Moreover I m certain that for the time being he doesn t think of another POV of the procedure because of this words of his which are somehow unclear at least to me Any new proposals will be speedy closed Persistence will be dealt with sanctions as per the WP ARBMAC probation this article is under the scope of concerning the closure of proposal I m not sure if he meant new proposals through the talk page of International recognition of Kosovo IroK or through the WP RM Actually I find WP RM somehow vague on the sequence of steps to be taken when new request proposal is to be made I ve tried to follow the procedure proposed as it is given at WP RM but then I might misunderstood something I might consider asking for explanation on the very own project s page as for that matter Hus as a formalist as I consider you at the moment I must ask you now this when you wrote all controversial move proposals must go through in order to have any validity you actully wanted to write all controversial move proposals should go through in order to have any validity I suppose I pointed out one might consider I ve used irony I apologize to those to the ambiguity of interpretation of the potential procedure since the very procedure hasn t been tagged as a guideline but still named a project to the least Maybe some other place exists which I m not aware of I apologize in advance for me being somewhat a whiner since I ve been passive and not searching for potential one myself Not to mention judgemental and still non constructive enough to contribute myself although recognition of the problem might be considered as form of contiributing action Sorry for that Ijanderson977 you asked Why are you not claiming that this article has a POV title International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia Well actually I do consider this title is biased also But personally I consider the IroK more globally important not just to me as one might think it is If the bias is dealt with this issue IroK title it could be dealt elsewhere also And IMHO it is good to keep the discussion in one place maybe creating a new page where this discussion concerning the term recognition or more could be taken should be considered as an idea All the best s talk