Talk:Republika Srpska/Archive 3

message: The New Bosnian Constitution 2006 has great changes. After 13 years world finally recognizes that Entity that was created by ethnic cleansing and genocide mainly populated by Serbs is coming to the end. Let Srebrenica be a constant reminder of genocide, hatred and ethnic cleansing of innocent Bosnian men, women and children by Serbs who are never tired of killing for the sake of their own ideologies. If nations are allowed to commit genocide with impunity, to hide their guilt in a camouflage of lies and denials, there is a real danger that other brutal regimes will be encouraged to attempt genocides. Government recognizes genocide in Bosnia as historical fact, we can leave this century of unprecedented genocides by Serbs with this blot on their consciences. == --209.86.97.172 21:03, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The end of ENTITY called "Republika Srpska" final in 2006 

message: Here is the complete set of numbers from UNHCR 1996 Bosnia-Herzegovina population census. They were posted for years on IMG-BH (International Management Group: Bosnia-Herzegovina) web site for public use. 
----
BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA
----
FEDERATION OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
----
REPUBLIKA SRPSKA
Based on this statistics population losses in FBiH were 650291 and in RS 691618.
It is not a matter of if the population losses happened but under what circumstances did it occur. I think that History_of_Republika_Srpska#Controversy section explains this quite well. 
Just to reiterate while in FBiH we had at least 4 major cities within an intensive conflict zone including Sarajevo, Mostar, Bihac and Tuzla in RS we had no major cities in intensive conflict zone.  In other words it is natural that many people would leave high intensity conflict zones.  On the other hand in Banja Luka and Prijedor where perhaps only a single shot was fired more than 100000 non-Serbs are missing.  Not to mention Podrinje and other regions that had Bosniak majority that was on the path of VRS offensive.  
However statistics stops short of putting the numbers in the time context so they are inconclusive.  It is quite possible that much of relocations took place after the war once the conflict was over and political boudaries were established which explains relative increase of Bosniak population in FBiH following the return of refugees after the war.   --Dado 17:17, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  UNHCR 1996 census info (from IMG-BH pages) 

message: I've read FreedonNadd's comments, and I do believe that the population section is indeed biased and one-sided without comments on the influx of Serb refugees. I took the liberty to report bias; moderation process will begin within five days.
: Anonimous user is not FreedonNadd. However, I personally opened a ticket with Mediation Cabal.--FreedonNadd 01:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, please. You haven't "read" FreedonNadd's comments, you are FreedonNadd and you wrote them. One look at your contributions and writing style makes it all perfectly clear. Also, you haven't reported anyone to any moderators or initiated any process, so stop trying to scare other users out of an arguement. Asim Led 00:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population section 

message: Hi, I'm your friendly cabal mediator :) FreedonNadd has requested cabal mediation regarding the dispute over the population section of the article. You can make comments here. I will look over the article and history and see if we can't find some common ground from which to build consensus. I would appreciate it if each side of the dispute could provide me with links as to their preferred version of the population section. Thanks - FrancisTyers 12:41, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, I've heard both sides, now I'm going to see if I can characterise the dispute. After that, I will be looking for sources for the assertions per WP:CITE. I will move discussion or refactor discussion below as I see fit. I would prefer to keep any discussion of sources above the mediation section. My apologies if you've already given sources somewhere else, but I would really appreciate it if you reiterated them here. :) - FrancisTyers 16:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I've added [p] for partial support. E.g. if a source supports some parts, but not others, like a number mismatch or something. - FrancisTyers 12:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mediation

message: So, it seems that this sentence is the one that is in dispute: The population of non-Serbs has declined significantly since 1991, while the number of Serbs increased dramatically. This was caused by the influx of Bosnian Serb refugees expelled from the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Bosnian war and Croatian Serb refugees expelled from Croatia, as well as the ethnic cleansing of non-Serb population.
Breaking that down, we get:
# The population of non-Serbs has declined significantly since 1991
# The population of Serbs has increased dramatically since 1991
# Bosnian Serbs were expelled from the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Bosnian war
# These expelled Bosnian Serbs became refugees in the RS
# Croatian Serb refugees were expelled from Croatia
# These expelled Croatian Serbs became refugees in the RS
# 1 was caused by ethnic cleansing of non-Serb population.
The thing that immediately strikes me is that there are no citations or sources for any of this. Also, in the case of number 3, we have a passive sentence structure which defines what, but not who. That is, who expelled the Bosnian Serbs? If you could add sources which support or oppose each of these points below I would be very grateful. Just put the url and then [s] or [o].
:I've added [p] for partial support. E.g. if a source supports some parts, but not others, like a number mismatch or something. - FrancisTyers 12:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dispute