Talk:Kosovo/Archive 11

message: After two years in Kosovo working on the ground in a secondary city in eastern Kosovo I have a few observations. The KLA was one of the most successful irregular armies in recent decades, run largely by former professional military officers from the Yugoslav National Army. The KLA had a great air force (NATO's) without which it's victory would have been impossible. UNMIK, the PISG and other elements of the international community have established facts on the ground that will lead to some kind of independence. And face it, Serbia lost the war. But nobody can say this. Effectively the damage done to Serbs in Kosovo is the result of the policies of the Serbian State under the leadership of Milosovic. One reason senior Serbian Officials have not been handed up to the Hague is that their legal defense will be "I was only following orders" And their defense team will seek evidence to support this - if they secure evidence it will be an indicment of Serbian state and people still in political power. I believe the three northern municipalities which are close to 100% Serb will be a defacto autonomous region of Kosovo and effectively under Belgrade's control. The current decentralization plan to create automonous Serb municipalites will be a cost that Kosovars will need to bear to secure independence, but the main question may be "Will it be enough for the Serbs living in those municipalities and the ultra-nationalists pulling the strings in Belgrade?" Also I believe that over time the smaller Serb villages will be depopulated as young Serbs seek their future in Serbia, parents age and land is sold to Albanians to secure capital for a flat in Nis or Belgrade. A fifteen year process, but the trend is already clear. Grove1 19:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A VIEW FROM lONG TERM INTERNATIONAL ADVISOR, AN OPINION

message: Why hide fact Albanian ARE MUSLIMS and SERBS ARE CHRISTIAN —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.3.69.196 (talk • contribs) 16:46, 9 August 2006
:Lots of Albanians are Muslims, but lots of them are Catholics. And in the modern world, plenty of them are atheist, like any other group of people; the same applies with Serbian people. It's a common generalisation, but it's not a "fact" as you claim in your edit summary. If you want to make this point, how about gathering some real statistics and improving the article with some well-researched demographics. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 15:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please go away if you're not going to contribute anything useful... -- ChrisO 22:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that. That the majority of Kosovar Albanians are Muslims does not have anything to do with terrorist activities or the 1999 war. Look at the 1991-95 Bosnian conflict, do Serb war crimes have anything to do with Christianity? Although religious symbols are certainly used and targeted in Kosovo I've never seen anyone say that Islam plays any role in the conflict. In my opinion, it is purely a nationalist conflict. Osli73 14:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: If you provide adequate sources for it, I'm ok with stating that KLA-members are actually Reptilian aliens. But we can't add your claims without proper backing, anonymous. Evv 20:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Religon

message: Please don't start edit wars over this article (it's had enough already). If you have a disagreement over the form of the article, please discuss it here and reach agreement, rather than fighting over it. -- ChrisO 13:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit-warring anonymous editors

message: August 26, 2006 Crazy Serbians send it from Serbian government in Mitrovica kill (injure) two Albanians. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.178.137.9 (talk • contribs) 19:11, 26 August 2006
:Hipi, you're getting tiresome - when will understand that we're all writing a BOOK here... --HolyRomanEmperor 10:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crazy Serbians terrorists mass 

message: I think this sentence is POV: The Ottomans brought Islamisation with them, particularly in towns, and later also created the Viyalet of Kosovo as one of the Ottoman territorial entities. This brought a great shift, as the Orthodox Serb population began to lose its majority when masses of Turks and Albanians moved to Kosovo. 
Many historians says that it can not be proved Serbs had majority in Kosovo before the Turks came. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noah30 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 27 August 2006
:Could you point them out? Actually, I've only seen quasi-historians' claims that support what you hold. Are you now going to say that the Great Migrations of the peoples to Europe (Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Avars, Huns, Slavs, Franks,...) never occured? --HolyRomanEmperor 10:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't know about Ducellier, but Malcolm certainly used to speak at pro-Albanian (or anti-Serb) rallies during the 1999 war. Personally, I have never heard anyone refer to him as a historian in an academic meaning of the word. According to Wikipedia, he has a doctorate, being an expert on Hobbes. I have heard some historians compare him to David Iriving, though -- not because he's an anti-Semite (as far as I know), but because they claim he's a revisionist. Alas, no references, though... But I guess the Wikipedia article says it all. Asav 22:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, there's lots of info at the Demographic History of Kosovo article - are you saying that all those Ottoman population censuses; researches of many a traveler (mostly Austrian, Jewish, British and French) that clearly state in Serb favour can be dismissed? That's the issue. In addition, Noel Malcom is not a historian and is widely known for his weird researches on dinosaurs; not to mention his short history of Bosnia, which is also essentially biased. HolyRomanEmperor 17:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  HolyRomanEmpror, Noel Malcolm’s book is the most cited book on Kosovo. Serbs like you do not like him or his books because he tells the truth, but someone has to do it. I am tired of Serbian revisionism, supported in one or another way by people like you.
Many censuses during the ottoman occupation of Kosovo show Albanian majority. 
You, Serbs, have built many beautiful churches in USA, does that mean that these places after 100 years should be Serbian?--Noah30 20:39, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ottoman rule

message: We are trying to reach a compromise. Please refrain from taking matters into your own hands. Although I greatly sympathise with the Kosovar grievances I don't think that the reverts by Dardan are the right thing to do. 
Lots of people here have come to your support by laying down well-informed arguments such as Envoy202 (who I thank greatly for his contributions). And we have managed to convince some Neutral Editors that the article was not Neutral in its previous state. We have made progress and the article now looks a lot less provocative, and it has been achieved without denting the truth.Tonycdp 13:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely here, this revert warring is useless, disruptive and shows a lack of respect for the people trying to reach compromises. If it doesn't end any time soon, I will take put this article and ALL editors involved (and yes that includes myself) up for arbitration by the arbitration committee. This sillyness has gone far enough now. Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 13:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I explanied my point very clearly. We cannot have a Serb nationalist pamphlet representing Kosovo. Not only it is innacurate, but it is offensive. I can accept Kosovo to be in a limbo, as it is, as a compromise. But I can never accept Kosovo to be put as part of Serbia, in the same manner that Bavaria is part of Germany. That is nonsense, for anyone who knows a little bit of what is happening in and around Kosovo. Kosovo is a landlocked territory in central Balkans under UN protrectorate. It is claimed by Serbia and by Kosovar Albanians. We need to portray both sides, as the situation is not set. But I will never agree to this article being a Serbian pamphlet. Vezaso 13:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Ilir_pz: That's not true. Read my earlier posts, and you'll find that I supported most of your positions all along. It was the way most editors dismissed your concerns about the map that prompted me to join the Kosovo club, because i felt like you were being patronised by the anti-albanian Admins who were ever so effectively using their knowledge of Wikipedia rules to dismiss your valid arguments as bullshit. So please matey, state your concerns here, but don't revert to a version that has not passed through this bureaucracy. Tonycdp 14:08, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not familiar with exactly how the arbitration committee works (I'll check that in a few moments), but from what I have seen so far it sounds like a good idea: these constant revert wars on issues contradicting WP:V are silly indeed. Evv 14:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Arbitration is a rather drastic thing to do, since it is not aimed at resolving content disputes, but at preventing abuse of the wiki-system by vandalism, POV pushing etc. More information can be found at: Wikipedia:Arbitration policy. I really hate to go this way, but we've gone through all other options and this is becoming crazy. I am currently preparing a submission to the Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee. Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 14:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the links :-) Evv 15:15, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Stop Revert Wars 

message: Is Turkish an official language?  I know it is used in some govt. documents but I was under the impression that the official languages were Albanian, Serbian and English.  Anyone know for sure? Davu.leon 14:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Albanian, Serbian and English are for sure the official languages. All the official documents issued by UNMIK contain these three. Turkish IS NOT an official language. It is a de-facto official language in Prizren because of the city's liberal attitude towards the turkish minority, but that's all.Tonycdp 14:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turkish 

message: I do not understand why people are pushing nationalist agendas here instead of being professional and improvint the neutral version that we agreed on previously. Dardan 00:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dardanv, your preferred version has not been agreed upon. Please refrain from reverting to it untill such an agreement is reached. Thanks already. Evv 00:19, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I also disagree that it's neutral. Whatever version we agree on must reflect our sources. They don't describe Kosovo in the way that you want to describe it. There's no "nationalist agenda" being pushed here - all we're insisting on is that WP:V and WP:RS be followed. -- ChrisO 00:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For the purposes of Wikipedia, the Kosovo Constitutional Framework is a primary source (see WP:RS): In general, Wikipedia articles should not depend on primary sources but rather on reliable secondary sources who have made careful use of the primary-source material. Evv 21:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: To: the folks that never knew about Internet, Communication, Neutrality, Kosovo before Wikipedia got launched in January 2001, Why you are afraid of accepting the truth and raising debates on facts that currently are. You keep refering articles on Kosovo that was written in 1989 today is 2006, tomorrow is the first day of September there is no August 2006 after tomorrow, same as there is no Serbia in Kosovo after 1999. I'm wondering how many of you have been in Kosovo at all, or lets say once. What will happen to Wikipedia Users who edit Kosovo soon after Kosovo gets its independence, will u continue to put still that Kosovo is part of Serbia just to have daydreaming or satisfy your self?kushtxh 09:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Editor's sympathies (if they have any) are irrelevant as long as they follow Wikipedia policies. As fas as I know, ChrisO does so, and it's only because he tries to enforce WP:V that he antagonizes other editors who disregard WP:V. Regards :-) Evv 21:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: (See also Talk:Kosovo/Archive 10#What other encyclopedias say. Evv 21:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree that not all sources are perfect. Yet that still leaves us with Encarta, Brittanica, BBC and CNN/AP as reliable sources that present Kosovo as a part of Serbia. And the last map I generated (which is also the current map) is very similar in idea to the BBC map, so that is allright with you then? --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 16:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Davu, see also Talk:Kosovo/Archive 10#What other encyclopedias say. Evv 21:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Ilip pz, please understand that, for the purposes of Wikipedia, the Kosovo Constitutional Framework is a primary source (see WP:RS): In general, Wikipedia articles should not depend on primary sources but rather on reliable secondary sources who have made careful use of the primary-source material. Evv 21:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: hahahhahahahhahahah ignore primary sources? and find reliable sources??? OH MY GODNESS!!! have no further comment to these weasel words. ilir_pz 09:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Previously agreed neutral option 

message: There is a sentence in the "future status" section that says:
:Belgrade frequently cites international law provisions about the integrity of sovereign states to justify its claim to Belgrade
I believe that should say "to justify its claim to Kosovo". Mike Dillon 19:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. That was a really dumb typo! -- ChrisO 19:18, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Done. --   Netsnipe  ►  16:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested edit in Future Status section 

message: Well, according to the Russian Federation and several other factors strengthening accross the world (Slovackia, Australia, Spain, France), it appears that they will not allow Kosovo's independence. President Putin consulted with the Federal government for a national decision on that matter - and it was adopted. What I find weird is that there is a strong necessity that the article contains info how Kosovo will become independent by the end of this year - however, according to the current situation - there is zilch chance that that will occur (at least this year, if the political scene doesn't change). --HolyRomanEmperor 20:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You may be interested to know that the BBC is reporting that the UN is now proposing greater autonomy within Serbia, not full independence.  -- ChrisO 20:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they're referring to the original resolution that's been around since the end of the war, actually.  And apropos our arguement over the word 'techincally,' "Although it technically remains part of Serbia, Kosovo has been administered by the UN since 1999," Davu.leon 13:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

text: In the Security Council Meeting, most states said they support the solution of the status issue by the end of the year, with the exception of Russia. It seems there will be a resolution and then states will be allowed to recognize the independence one by one. The US, the UK, Slovenia and Switzerland will be the first and then it will be up to Kosovo to convince Russia and a few other opponent states. Palmucha 19:30, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why do you use will? How can you know that for certain? I may now say Kosovo will vansih from the face of the earth and will be replaced by an Anglican Theocratic state - however, it would be far from the truth. The UK (mostly under the influence of the people, "brainwashed" ) by the BBC) is changing its thouts on Kosovo's independence. The number of opposing countries is larger than that of those who support (where in truth only USA is firmly present). Now, if Russia's vero right is present there, how can you even consider such a thing? The only sufficient thing is to say VETO in the Roman traditions and that which is considered will be dismissed. All in all, we could discuss the future of Kosovo for dhours, even days - and whatever we say, it almost certainly won't be that way. --HolyRomanEmperor 19:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Can I ask why is it even believed that the UN Security Council can proclaim independence of a part of a UN member country? Nikola 20:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird... 

message: For the record,  has been identified and indefinitely blocked as a sockpuppet of . See  for details. -- ChrisO 23:44, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about Evv and Nikola Smolenski, and YOU yourself violating the injunction???ilir_pz 10:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I new something was strange regarding Vezaso. To my personal opinion, he is in fact another sockpuppet alone him/herself. --HolyRomanEmperor 11:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Violations of injunction

message: :New fenomen - Intro - For arabas Israel dont exist - Top ten.
:Original discussion is here. Evv 11:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments by Hipi Zhdripi

message: *UNMIK's Media Monitoring: includes a cable by AP from Camp Bondsteel, Serbia and Montenegro... a U.S. military base in the U.N.-administered province of Kosovo. Ok, Kosovo is a Serbian province under UN-administration :-) 
These are sources whose objective is NOT to describe Kosovo's current status, but who merely deal with Kosovo and mention it, but without aiming for an accurate definition.
*A 2001 letter from Ljubco Georgievski to Kofi Annan, regarding the armed violence by the regional Albanian paramilitary army, the aggression from the Kosovo territory, asking to stop the export of violence and terrorism from Kosovo.
*A 2004 speech by Jaromir Novotny, Czech ambassador to India: We have created two international protectorates (BiH and Kosovo)... Kosovo is actually governed by local mafia organizations, and the society there is one of the most corrupts in the world.
Most (if not all) organizations and NGOs avoid entering into the details of Kosovo's status for diplomatic reasons: they work with Kosovars, would gain nothing from antagonizing them and lose nothing from dropping the Serbian province part :-) These are not reliable sources to determine Kosovo's current status, especially when compared with Talk:Kosovo/Sources.
*Zhaba, an NGO active in Kosovo/a Territory Currently Under UN Administration.
*EkoMrezaBiH: An enviromentalist group dealing with enviromental law, active in Kosovo/a (territory under interim UN administration).
Regards. Evv 19:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Kosovo is the serbian version for the name Kosova. As soon as Kosova will be independent, the international name will be 'Kosova'. In the same manner Moldavia decided to be called Moldova in English. As for the links, I decided to present some that are against Kosovo as well. I used links from the neighbouring states, from UNMIK and from other international sources. I assume you are not assuming good faith? Semarforikuq 21:54, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I assume you are not assuming good faith? -- The irony -- Apart from that, its still Moldavia in English... --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 21:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually semaforikuq is completely right. I checked now Moldova and republika srpska, in both cases the enlgicised version is the local. So, from now on, I suggest refering to Kosovo as Kosova. I also suggest moving the page to that name as the first official language in Kosova is Albanian. Why should the English version derive from Serbian? And the story of Kosova being important for Serbia is nothing but nationalistic propaganda to justify Serbian claims. Late Prime Minister Djindjic has said that the reason why the myth of Kosova was created is because Serbia had the collapsing Ottoman Empire in the south and the strong Austo-Hungarian empire towards the north. Serbia had no population in these Ottoman territories, so the only way they could justify overtaking it, was by portraying it as an important historical heartland and other mythical BS. Medeival Serbia does not have much in common with today Serbia. The Serb stock today is composed of multiethnic people who speak Serbian. The descendants of the Nemanja family are Albanians and live in the villages near Decan. They say that Nemanja was Albanian too. Neither is important!. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dardanv (talk • contribs) 07:54, 19 September 2006
Ack...not "Kosova"!  After independence, they can call the place anything they want.  In the meantime, I tell everybody that "Kosovo" is extremely well-established English usage, which is included in lots and lots of official documents.  Whenever K-Albs complain about this, I often respond by saying, "Hey, I don't call it Kosovo i Metohija either!"  Envoy202 23:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Semarforikuq sources on Kosovo's status

message: For the peopel who dont know "self diskussios" or discussions from a person with himself are not alowed in Wikipedia--Hipi Zhdripi 06:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  self diskussios 

message: Editors may wish to note that Dardanv has been conclusively identified as the puppetmaster of the ,  and  accounts. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo#Log of blocks and bans. It has been proposed that he be banned indefinitely from all editing on Wikipedia. -- ChrisO 08:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I think a ban is too harsh - better make it a month-block. --HolyRomanEmperor 16:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sockpuppetry by Dardanv 

message: I've modified the introduction and added a new article, Constitutional status of Kosovo. Please add any comments on the latter to Talk:Constitutional status of Kosovo! -- ChrisO 19:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work. Consider adding a see also section for the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government and the Constitutional Framework for the Provisional Self-Government of Kosovo if you think it is worth it. The latter needs a lot of work, the former is mainly a stub I put together from primary sources. Also, not sure whether it is appropriate to add the  tag to the last entry. Regards, Asteriontalk 20:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Very good work indeed :-) Evv 21:20, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The statement is here  and there's an informative story here  . I quoted Sanders simply because her statement was about the most succinct summary of the CG's position that I've come across. (You know how convoluted diplospeak gets! ;-) Thanks for the comments - I'm looking forward to seeing your more detailed comments. -- ChrisO 00:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes to intro, new article

message: OK after somany years talk, and talk. The soluion is easy:
# The serbs say Kosovo was part of Serbia History . (OK)
# Kosovars say thate they wont independent. (OK)
----
* We must late how they wont let as make a deal:
# Kosovo late as the History of Serbia (they must be happy with thate becose all the time they are maken souch noice "History, Hixtory ..."). 
# And for the Kosovars let they take a independent state withing Serbian history. (they must be happy with thate becose all the time they are maken souch noice "Inependent-Indpenden...").
----
I think this is a big compromise:
# The kosovars accept the serbian mytologie als history and
# the serbs accept the Kosovo state als independent
----
For als in Wiki let it bee in this way.--Hipi Zhdripi 04:49, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SOLUTION 

message: Kosovar parliamentarians have finally balked under international pressure to make Turkish official. 
I'm going to slightly change the description to clarify that Turkish is only official in the Prizren District and not in the whole of Kosovo as it currently implies.Tonycdp 11:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Turkish Language Official

message: ChrisO is not the wounder thate we can not make a gut aricle beacose you are maken troubels and mixen the names. Serbia is Serbia this is correct name. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and SFR of Yugoslavia is SFR of Yugoslavia. Are they stupied (in UN) thate they iusse this  terms and you are so intelegent thate you know better then they wicth hase this as profesion? Miloshevq was intelegent to, he wountit to know better solution then UN and now you cant accept thate Kosovo for Serbia is lost. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 15:59, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Serbia will lose Kosovo when Kosovo stops being a part of it. --HolyRomanEmperor 16:59, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes pretty soon HipiTonycdp 22:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is happen see there we dont have the name "Serbia" in Rez. 1244 and we dont have in last statment, but is your problem thate you can not accept. I am not a doctor to help you. You must go and protest to Millosheviq. If you wount Kosovo back you must lerne to live without kalashnikow unter your bett and start to discuse with aruments not with mytologie.--172.174.165.94 (IP of ) 07:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mixing the name 

message: How I can see you wount Edit wars. Im not interesed in souch thinks. Beacose at first the future of Kosovo will not be disaidet here in Wiki but in UN. You are thinkin thate I wount to make propagander. Thate is not true. If I wount to make propagander like the sebs here in Wiki, then I will make a propagander for Kosovo as part of Albania like it wase in History. Why the germans have right to live together in one state and albanians not? Albanians have a kompakt territorys in balkan and they live there since the history know thete ther live the humen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 08:17, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never part of Serbia? But how? It has been a part of it since 1945 and remains to this very present day. North Kosovo was before and after 1999 a part of Serbia and it even was in the Axis puppet Kingdom of Serbia in 1941-1944. Before that, it has continually been a part of Serbia since 1912. Before that, it was a part of the short-lived liverated Serbia in the 16th century. Before that, it was a part of the Serb state from the 12th century to the 15th century, while Metohija itself was a part since the 7th century. What's this never than? Also, you're mentioning the Germans, a united Albanian state? Are you aware that you're talking about Neo-Nazism and Greater Albania? --HolyRomanEmperor 14:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I have never in my wiki-life tried to present a "Greater Serbia" - nor do I mention those words. What percisely are you incinuating? --HolyRomanEmperor 16:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit wars

message: Way the albanians cooperet with USA. Beacose there is a member of a large family of the slav in History witch hase traing to elimined this folk from the Earth. Ofcours thate since the Rusia was the big power this member of the slaw family Serbia hase present his propaganda easy to the west. Till this century there was a number of the westen "historians" witch beleved thate the Albanians dont exist! This is happend with some historians thate work only in Tabel and dont se what is hapend in Ground. Kosovo was never as part of Serbia but it was presentet als souch. Like they wount to present now. They don have nothing in Kosovo and they wount here to presante here Kosovo als part of Serbia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 08:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What's your WP:Point? --HolyRomanEmperor 16:14, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Way the albanians?

message: I have read this bullshit here above my text but i can't understand it. On this page these discussions are unlogical and stupid till the judgement about the future of Kosovo comes. Everbody knows, that Kosovo is still an part of Serbia, and it always will be. Discussions about who came first in Kosovo are not objective enough. So illiers came first but that does'nt mean its their land. Who fought 600 jears ago in the Ottoman Empire against the Ottoman Army? Yes the SERBS and MONTENEGRINS. What did albania to protect Kosovo nothing. Serbs and Montenegrin people gived her lives for this land and now claimes some %^&%* people Kosovo. Albania was before Tito selfs not recognised by the world as an county. Albanians came all in Kosovo for an better live. Serbs gave them that and what gave the Albanians the Serbs for thank? Nothing other than shit!!! In Kosovo Serbs had schools, markets, everything that a county needs to be succesfully. Albanians had the chance to join Serbs schools, to learn Serbian language, everything but they did it not. And why not? Because they would to destabilize Kosovo and set it to their hand. And now they have it.
Many of Serbian curchs are destroyed, fired and whatever. They build them now again up, but the tower may not be longer than musquees. WTF ? And Albanians say they would like to create an democration when Kosovo come independace? Yeah right. The premier of Kosovo is an former KLA officer. All these things are organized to provocate and discrime the Serbian people in teur own land!! Its not fair and they human rights are not strong enough there.
Everbody says yeah Serbia must shut up they would like to have Kosovo because they want to create an greater Serbia. Kosovo is Serbia there is no great Serbia with Kosovo only if Serbia would get Republic of Srpska and Republic of Srpska Krajina.
And let me ask you all why Albanians would like to get Kosovo? Not because they luiver the with 90 %. No but because they would like to have an greater Albania!
They are nothing better than te Serbs.
Just my 2 cents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.126.152.198 (talk • contribs) 09:38, 28 September 2006
:You have right, everybody in Serbia know thate Kosovo is part of Serbia but the "stuped" UN diden writet thate in Rez 1244 and the "stupied" CG in there statemant diden findet this combination of the strings "Serbia" - hipi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 13:44, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ? --HolyRomanEmperor 16:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Serbian Kosovo

message: There - North Kosovo - anyone who thinks he can contribute should try their best. --HolyRomanEmperor 14:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok Let's also have Southern North Kosovo, ok how about West Kosovo, and this is also a must Corn Fields of North Kosovo. I can sense progress on the Kosovo Issue. It is about to become the best described region in the world. It already has a history section longer than that of the USA.Tonycdp 15:42, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahem - North Kosovo is to Kosovo what Kosovo is to Serbia. If Kosovo becomes independent, so will North Kosovo. There is no such thing as "West Kosovo" or "Southern North Kosovo" as an independent entity. The Pristina rule has absolutely no authority in North Kosovo - but it does have some (or most) in the rest of Kosovo. Your comparation is silly. --HolyRomanEmperor 17:15, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessarily so, HRE. The Contact Group has been adamant about keeping Kosovo united and the Kosovo Albanians have rejected any possibility of partition. Unfortunately Belgrade has been playing silly games by encouraging the Kosovo Serbs to boycott the PISG. They've been strongly criticised for this by pretty much the whole international community - see http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8827.doc.htm for Joachim Rücker's briefing of the UN Security Council on 13 September. There's an interesting article at the IWPR's website, published last week, which explores some of the dilemmas that this poses - see http://www.iwpr.net/?p=brn&s=f&o=324126&apc_state=henpbrn . -- ChrisO 18:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking through it right now. Seems very interesting. I noticed something weird though - the Kosovar leadership is strictly for unity and no partitionism - but strictly for the independence of Kosovo; saying "we can live together" and "we cannot live together, but we can live next to each other" at the same time. This clearly incinuates at the actual POV of the Kosovar government.  Also, North Kosovo is out of juristiction from the Kosovar government - but Serbian, rather. Just as Kosovo is factually independent from Serbia since 1999 - so is North Kosovo factually independent from Kosovo since 1999. --HolyRomanEmperor 12:01, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Kosovo hase event 100,000 sebs and wikipedia hase more article about Kosovo thane serbs in Kosovo. Do you realy wount to make a artice about every "serbian stone" and sebr in Kosovo? Is only a quesen. - hipi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 13:47, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kosovo has more than 100,000 ethnic Serbs - and before the war it had more than 200,000 (and in one period over 300,000) - what are you trying to say, anyway? --HolyRomanEmperor 16:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

text: For political reasons I would disagree with the article on Northern Kosovo, because it does in some way promote the idea of separation, and its not worthy of a separate article. However the prospect of more information on that region is quite exciting and is something I'll be looking forward to. I can see the focus shifting to that region for many more years to come. Perhaps it would be better if there is a section "Northern Kosovo Issue" or something similar within the Kosovo article itself.Tonycdp 14:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Politics has nothing to do with writing an Encyclopedia. As far as I recall, you and this article promoted the idea of seperation of Kosovo of Serbia - so why do you object? Also, what makes it unworthy? I did suggest a section at first. Anyway - Kosovo's independence will almost definately result in North Kosovo seccession as well. --HolyRomanEmperor 16:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The problem is North Kosovo is a seperate territory somehow distinct. ;)) --HolyRomanEmperor 23:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northern Kosovo 

message: I have been looking through the contributions of User:Tonycdp, and I am almost 100% certain that he is yet another sockpuppet. Of Dardanv, perhaps (he's the sockpuppet master here - no offence intended). --HolyRomanEmperor 14:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Damn you're so clever I can't keep up with you. You could even challenge ChrisO and his poodle Asterion for the title "Sherlock Holmes of Wikipedia". Drum RolllllllTonycdp 15:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I can't tell if this is sarcasm or confirmation... --HolyRomanEmperor 17:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tonycdp definitely isn't a sockpuppet of Dardanv. In the course of putting together the evidence for this arbitration, I was able to find a considerable amount of personal information about Tonycdp which clearly indicates that he and Dardanv are two different people. (Out of respect for his privacy, I obviously won't be posting the detailed evidence.) It's worth noting that although he isn't a sockpuppet, he has used false identities for disruptive purposes, as the Arbitration Committee has already provisionally found - see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo/Proposed decision#Tonycdp is disruptive. -- ChrisO 18:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok Mr Sherlock Holmes (ChrisO), my email is qcpass@gmail.com. Would you be kind enough to tell me who I really am. I hope its not the owner of www.kajtazi.com (as you skillfully discovered) cuz I am not even going to entertain it. By the way I have replied to your allegations on a page that seems to have disappeared. P.S. Thanks for respecting my privacy, I really appreciate it, you're a star, I love you.Tonycdp 19:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tonycdp 

message: Can you explen us, from witch planet cames Albaners? I think this is mnore importen beacose we know now thate in Serbian mytologie Kosovo is part of Serbia, From serbian mytologie I know thate Albaners camme to Kosovo with some ships, but I diden undertandet from witch planet?- hipi—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 12:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your Wikipedia:POINT? Funny that you mention it, there's a rather interesting building in Serbia called Planet Albania. :))) --PaxEquilibrium 15:42, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Eho: Funny that you mention it, there's a rather interesting building in Serbia called Planet Albania.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 22:45, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ...yes? --PaxEquilibrium 23:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sherlock Holmes of Mytologie

message: Go and look counsttution of Serbia there is no Kosovo at all????—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 22:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dont remove without argument see ez 1244 and last CG statmant there is no terms "Serbia" they iusse only Yougoslavia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 23:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uhh, again - your WP:POINT? --PaxEquilibrium 23:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uhhh are you happy. I am happy to beacose I dont spend so mauch time to profe to the rest of user thate I am Wikipedian and I wount to be Administrator, Till for one month you wontit to be Administrator and now you have forgoit thate to provaced a vandal how you call me is not a gut face for a kanditad for Administrator.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 23:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I am wayting ChristO (perhaps you are thate) to "place" here his real face to the rest of comunity —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 23:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I perfectly understand your words (can read them, despite your low-level English) - what I meant is I SIMPLY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT DO YOU WANT (TO SAY). --PaxEquilibrium 23:27, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Go and look counsttution of Serbia 

message: Can anybody from administrators protect this page till we dont have the document from UN thate Kosovo is part of Serbia. Dont intepret the term the UN is iusen today the name Yougosllavia wha we shold use Serbia??? We have ther links witch explene the use the REALTY de facto and de juro. We dont need to meake here discusions. We dont nede to work with serbian or UÇK Law. Serbia is saying thate Kosovo is part of Serbia, UÇK is aying thate Kosovo is independent UN is sayint that part of Yougoslavia. You can bloc me but belev me is beter to protect the page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 23:27, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hipi, go and read #Only one above. And please stop violating the injunction. The Arbitration Committee has already voted to ban you from editing Kosovo-related articles - you're on the right course to earn a ban from editing Wikipedia, period. -- ChrisO 23:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: wery fine. At all your presantet "document" is not this combination o strings "Serbia" nevermeter they are not documents but daili brifing in witch is standing (Serbia and Montenegro) from some protocoll writers who from serbian propagander think realy thate "Serbia and Montenegro" is a same think like Yugoslavia. hahahah —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 05:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protect the page 

message: ...violated the ArbCom decision again (and he wasn't blocked yet) - when is someone going to block him for this? --PaxEquilibrium 23:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes but not ChristO. He is not neutrale. You are coopereting. This is agnins Wiki roul. Calle another administrator and I am going to stop, - HIPI —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 00:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Other admins did come. They all agreed. AFAIC< i don't know a single admin that didn't block you at least once... :) --PaxEquilibrium 09:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hipi Zhdripi 

message: If all Wiki administrators are protecting your metologie like ChrisO then "hallal". -- HIPI —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 00:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What mythology???--PaxEquilibrium 09:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When you from a object imagened another wountit form, fantasy object and make it in history a figur is Mitologie. Now UN is talking about Kosovo part of Yugoslavia and your fantasy is maken part of Serbia. Before a week I was thinking thate Im wrong, from so much sebian mitology here in Wiki but thanks Got the statment of the CG told to me no you are OK but the HRE is in telling you fantasy. What cann I do before 7 jahrs UN said Kosovo part of Yugoslavia and now is saing the same thing and you are saying a same thing with imagenedet fantasy Serbia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 06:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I repeat: WHAT MYTHOLOGY, WHAT FANTASY - show me where I said such things... --PaxEquilibrium 10:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: If you thing thate

message: So is better, beacose everybodie know thate Kosovo is not part of Serbia but is Protectet (protectoriat) with all the serbian mytologie inseide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 00:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kosovo is officially a part of Serbia that is under UN protection - the article relfects that. Why are you opposing? --PaxEquilibrium 09:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, ok, but you and ChristO clique must be intelegent als Contact Gruop. For thate you cann explen me Why UN diden say before the start of the proces "Kosovo is province in Serbia" and in the last statment too. They know everything what you know about Kosovo and Serbia and Yugosllavia too, but they iusse Kosovo province in Yugoslavia. UN is talking about Kosovo als province in Yougoslavia. This article is named Kosovo als province in Yugosllavia (at the start of this article your clique has told to me I shold make a article named Kosovo (UNMIK) and now?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 06:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are refering to that one single UN resolution - then because it was in 1999 the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia; it changed name to "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro" in 2003 and it dissolved in Serbia, both times receiving instructions from the UN, recognizing Serbia's sovereignity over Kosovo. If you are saying that they should change a whole resolution just because a country slightly changed! - ofcourse they won't do that. Aside from that; ofcourse, the UN considers Kosovo a part of Serbia, under its protectorate. Heck, even the Albanian nationalist Self-determination movement of Kosovo says that its a part of Serbia. Tell me, if it's not a part of Serbia - why is it seeking independence? Koovo isn't seeking recognition of independence, it's seeking independence. --PaxEquilibrium 10:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  So is better 

message: I dont wount to play a games with many user accounts. I have only one account you dont have to forget thate.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) -using the IP - 00:53, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope.  If you have an account, edit from the account; unless you have been banned from the article, in which case you shouldn't be editing it from an IP address either. Thatcher131 06:29, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He has got an account. Refer to :template:Hipi Zhdripi and check "What links here". This is simply and clearly an attempt to evade the arbitration injunction. Thanks, Asteriontalk 06:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That was me being nice. Check out the related user talk pages. Thatcher131 06:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, cheers :o) Asteriontalk 06:53, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hipi also had tens of sockpuppets - Kurac, Kanuni, User:Zhdripi Hipi, Henonan, etc. --PaxEquilibrium 09:50, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please bloc the page for everybody 

message: The image gallery have a picture named "Ura e Fshejte on the White Drini river". I fouded this image on wikimedia commons, but since this is English Wikipedia, can somebody translate words "Ura e Fshejte" into English? PANONIAN (talk) 15:56, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What is "Ura e Fshejte"?

message: Serbia/Yugoslavia is often misinterpreted as the loser of the war. It's often that Serbia's "loss" of Kosovo allegedly comes from the results of the Kosovo war. However, considering that the government fought the separatists; Miloshevich himself anf the majority of the public saw this as a victory and Kosovo (Pristina)'s defeat. "UN forces are comming to finally ease-down the tense situation on Kosovo; guarranteeing compromise between both sides and Serbia's sovereighnity over Kosovo". It was actually seen as a "victory" - with those who fought for the independence of a part of a country, losing. I wonder how everyone missed/misses this? --PaxEquilibrium 16:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh - it has nothing to do with me; you misunderstood. It's true that Milosevic turned every defeat into a victory, but I was just presenting another point of view; another observation's edge - that does not mean that I share the view or have anything whatsoever to do with it. Actually, the greater part (majority?) of the Serbian population is celebrating the final end of the state union with Montenegro, seeing it as a final resolving of a 16-year old torture. I myself witnessed a party in honor of Serbia's independence from Montenegro held by a mediocre townsman in New Belgrade. :) Cheers, and please don't get me wrong. ;D --PaxEquilibrium 13:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I personally was pretty unhappy about it, but many Serbs saw it as the end of Montenegro taking advantage of Serbia. In the same way, if Scotland became independent, English people might celebrate the end of the the "Scottish raj". --estavisti 16:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have to understand that in the 1990s it wasn't as many claim Montenegro controlled by Serbia, but more likely vice-versa. Under Milosevic (himself a Montenegrin), the majority of the political leadership (as well as the leadership of Republika Srbska, including Radovan Karadzic himself) was Montenegrin (1989-2000). Afterwards, Svetozar Marovic - a member of Milosevic's own "gang" became the sole Head of State of the Serbia-Montenegro Union in 2003-2006. Actually, many blame Serbia and ask it to fullfill this & that solely because of its alleged role in the Yugoslav wars & similiar - but it appears that there is more reason to apply such harsh & rude generalization to Montenegro, rather. --PaxEquilibrium 18:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other side