Talk:Belgrade/Archive 1

message: Why is 2003 added to the time that Belgrade is the capital of Yugoslavia?  Will it no longer be the capital after 2003? -- Zoe
:It will still be the capital, but Yugoslavia will no longer exist - it's being (been?) renamed Serbia & Montenegro.  I had thought the name change occurred in 2002, though this isn't reflected in the Yugoslavia article - can anyone confirm? Enchanter
It will be renamed during the year,final constitutional confirmations are awaited from serbian and montenegrin parliaments...
After rigged elections in 2000 Belgrade was the site of major demonstrations which caused the ousting of president Slobodan Milošević.
Is whoever wrote this asserting that the elections were rigged, or is there a general consensus? If the latter, among whom? I assume more than one person says it, but more than one person says the same thing about the elections here that year, and it would still be POV to declare it baldly somewhere. --Charles A. L. 16:58, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
Socialists admited rigging!Milosevic didn`t.Avala
I replaced the photo and para removed by user:213.137.124.218 at 16:03, 31 Oct 2004 - it appears to have been removed in error. --Ali@gwc.org.uk 19:34, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Various 

message: The format of this article is starting to get a little out of hand.  I'm going to attempt to rearrange the multitude of photos that have been posted by contributions: Kris12, so that they fit into the structure a little better.  Perhaps someone who actually knows what they're doing could help out a little :)
Dupz 01:10, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll try to help... Wikipedia isn't picture gallery, picture gallery of Belgrade is here. --Dijxtra 11:20, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: What's happening with it? --estavisti 09:53, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location map 

message: How is Belgrade written in the Cyrillic alphabet? Edward 23:16, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cyrillic alphabet 

message: Would anyone object to minimizing the night life section, as this is supposed to be an encyclopedic article, not a tourist guide describing every place to hang out in Belgrade? --dcabrilo 00:21, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nighlife section 

message: I created it: Wikipedia:WikiProject Belgrade --HolyRomanEmperor 18:26, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikiproject Belgrade 

message: The quotes section is rather POV. All of the quotes kind of glorify the city and they are certainly not well balanced. So, just like with photos, we can put on a good or a bad quote, thus introducing a POV. I suggest we sack the entire section (there is wikiquotes for that anyway). --dcabrilo 06:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes 

message: Belgrade has won the competition in the category of South European City of Future, after previoisly holding the title of "South-East-Central European City of Future". Belgrade got selected because of its cheep but qualified labour force, low prices and big investments, as well as the standard of living which is one of the highest in this part of Europe (there's a big gap between Serbian North, where Belgrade lies, and its poor South:(). New pics have also been added to this article, the city needs some good marketing after a very tough decade.;) Belgrade became popular among Ex Yugoslav nations as "Sin City"- where you can party your a** off without spending as much as in other Central European capitals; clubbing became one of the new brands of the city. Belgrade is also expecting a big boom in investments in the years to come, as it approaches the EU.
City of Future Article            User:NeroN_BG
: Also www.fdimagazine.com. Can someone put this link into article b/c my Firefox with Google Toolbar breaks due to extreme article size. Shinhan 17:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  True;) 

message: There is a problem with pictures in the article and the way they affect the layout in wide windows on reasonably high-res screens. For example, "Geography" section starts with a huge gap to accomodate the two pictures from previous section(s). Perhaps we should do some of the following:
* Eliminate some pictures which don't add value as they are now
* Move the pictures from the floating right strip to their own galleries, perhaps even their own articles
* Reduce the size of thumbnails - they are rather large by Wikipedia standards
* Move all right-hand images into first-section and let them span as far as they need (essentially reserving right side for those images only), something like in History of computer hardware in the SFRY
We should also improve pictures. If anyone can take fresh/better pictures that would be nice:
* Kralja Milana Street picture is rather pale
* "The Victor" picture is really not the picture of the Victor, but of New Belgrade. Victor is to the left, headless (head is out of the picture)
* Despot Stefan Tower picture is also rather pale, I could try editing it but it would be better if retaken
* Map of municipalities only includes numbers that have to be looked up from the list, leaving a huge white gap. I'll see what I can do, but if anyone has a better, ready-made solution, please yell...
--Aleksandar Šušnjar 16:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures & Layout

message: I can't find free pictures for this event, and think it would be nice to have some in the article. Also, number of demonstrators should be in the text (half million, million... I cant remember). For now, I put external link with nice photos. Lakinekaki 17:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  October 5

message: Well done on the article, it's really perfect. Let's nominate it for a Featured Article. --serbiana - talk 02:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: OK

message: I was under the impression that there is no "University of Arts", only "Academy of Fine Arts". If it is so it should link to Academy of Fine Arts, Belgrade.
Also, I added external links to all universities that don't (yet?) have their own page at WP.
According to Government information website Military Academy URL is www.vojna.akademija.mod.gov.yu which does not exist. So no link for them. Shinhan 12:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Universities 

message: "Old Belgrade is situated in South-Eastern Europe, with one part on the Balkan Peninsula". Please stop vandalising the article. Balkan peninsula and Southeastern Europe are synonyms so this sentance does not bear any rational meaning. Vojvodina indeed belongs to Central Europe and so does Zemun and even New Belgrade, the latter however only geographically. To check out the borders of the Balkans see Central Europe, Balkan peninsula etc. Balkan peninsula reaches Sava and Danube which is where it merges into Central Europe. User:NeroN_BG.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Luzzifer"
*Thanks for the advice. And? Sorry, man but you are absolutly wrong. "See the article Central europe, Balkan peninsula". Balkan is not the same es South-Eastern europe at all- the borders of Balkan peninsula are Sava and Danube, the borther of south-eastern europe is the northern border of Serbia (Vojvodina), as well as of Croatia. Sorry, that educational system let you down, that's why we have Wiki. :)
pozz, --Luzzifer 10:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Central Europe 

message: There are so many nice pictures of Belgrade, these on this site are among the most awful I've ever seen. Do we really have to accept ugly picture of Kalemegdan tower etc. I even think that someone has been puting so ugly pictures on purpose.
Take a look at Zagreb page. Pictures are grate there.
--Luzzifer 20:21, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PICTURES OF BELGRADE 

message: Religious architecture and architectural projects under construction have both been moved to subpages. Standard and Evropa - haven't even heard of the former, to call the latter popular would be stretching the outer reaches of credibility. As for the medieval names, why remove them? --estavisti 21:56, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RV, explained 

message: #Borba is still coming out, their site is at http://www.borba.co.yu/.
#NIN and Vreme are by far the two most popular and respected  newsweeklies in Serbia and Belgrade. This should not be deleted.
#One of the reasons the article failed its Featured Article nomination is that is was packed full of lists. So I don't see how pasting in a list from the List of notable buildings in Belgrade subpage improves the article.
#"In recent years growing numbers of young people, especially from Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, have visited Belgrade to enjoy the city's nightlife." It's unclear why this sourced statement is being deleted.
Hope we can get a clarification on this soon, instead of more silent reverts. By the way, I don't appreciate it when I'm spuriously accused of vandalism, especially given how much work and time I've put into this article. --estavisti 00:59, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tourism & Media 

message: So, I was talking with Violeta Antonijević from the Assembly of the City of Belgrade and she convinced me that, couple of months ago, the coat of arms has changed, and the new coat incorporates name of Belgrade and URL of its official site. This is probably the first coat of arms in the world which incorporates an URL... Nikola 12:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WTF OMG! Evo krstim se i levom i desnom... Duja► 15:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, don't you think the white bicephalic eagle better represents Serbia as well and you can see relationship with Coat of arms of Serbia? // Laughing Man 01:36, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to say that the large coat of arms also has the text, but I didn't managed to upload it. Nikola 06:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New coat of arms 

message: I won't revert because the article is going to be on the main page, but in any other case I would. Zocky's claims are ridiculous on several grounds:
* The claim that Croats and Albanians had nothing to do with occupation of Belgrade is irrelevant because the sentence is about the occupation of entire Yugoslavia (Yugoslavia was invaded by German, Italian, Hungarian and Bulgarian forces...).
* Even if it would not be the case, the Croats had very much to do with occupation of Belgrade specifically, as the very outskirts of Belgrade were ceded to Croatia.
* The claim that "Serbian collaborators under Nedić" have anything to do with occupation of Belgrade is patent nonsense because Nedic's government was formed on August 29, while German troops entered Belgrade on April 12, some 3 1/2 months before.
Nikola 19:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WWII 

message: So, I think that References section should go to the bottom of the article because:
* Proposed order of sections in WP:GTL is apparently a relic of a time before the introduction of Cite extension, when articles had a few references, and section order didn't matter much. Now, articles have dozens of references, and if References section is above other sections, it visually blocks them.
* WP:GTL says that It is okay to change the sequence of these appendices anyway.
* There is discussion about which order should be preferred in WP:GTL right now.
* Sections were in that order when the article was featured. Nikola 14:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Still, the current practice is to keep them before external links and before further reading. When that changes, we can change in this article. As I said in an edit summary, this is not a discussion for this article. Zocky | picture popups 16:15, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The current practice is that it is okay to change the sequence of these appendices. You are advising to follow the letter of the guideline without regard to actual outcome of it or how will it affect our readers. Nikola 17:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of sections 

message: I changed the picture of the arena because the previous one wasn't saying much
Now, since it seems to me that the new one is obviously better and I'm not sure why it wasn't already in use, does it have to do something with the copyright? If there is a reason why it wasn't used in the first place, revert it anyway, just say about it here -- 89.216.244.194 15:04, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the copyright is the problem. The image page doesn't say who is the author, and the image looks quite professional, and there are similar problems with some of the other images sent by the same user. Nikola 16:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  BG Arena 

message: Isn't it a bit of long shot to claim continuity back from Vincha? I mean, obvious city nucleus is on Kalemegdan and Dortiol area. Historically it was only recently that city territory expanded on Vincha, after Grocka municipality was incorporated. There are neolithic sites closer to the city, Banjica being one confirmed and I've heard that there might be some findings even in Kalemegdan area (need someone to comment on that one).
Vincha IS one of the most important and famous archeological sites around, but hey, let's not sacrifice the truth for some undeserved and unneeded addition to Belgrade's already significant history.
:Yes, however, while the most well known, and eponymous, findings of Vinca culture do come from Vinca, there are other settlements of the Vinca culture in Belgrade, for example a well known one is on Banjica which is the wider center of Belgrade today. It is safe to assume that there was one on Kalemegdan which was completely removed by the later ones, as it was as strategically important position then as it is now. I'll rephrase Zocky's rephrasing.
:Ironically, some excavations discovered even earlier Neanderthal population but it isn't in the article I couldn't find a reliable reference about it. Nikola 16:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All of that doesn't make Vinča the same thing as Belgrade. We all know Neanderthals lived near Krapina, yet nobody is claiming that they founded Krapina. Zocky | picture popups 01:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but wouldn't you say that Krapina area is inhabited since Neanderthal times? Nikola 23:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vincha? 

message: Let's move it.  Or isn't that one of the "brightest moments" talked about above?  Gene Nygaard 14:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Basketbrawl city

message: I just wanted to point out that User:TodorBozhinov has listed this article under Featured Article Review (FAR) as he has some questions regarding the quality of the article.  Please review and provide your comments on the FAR page. // laughing man 16:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd rather say, fix the article so that it satisfies the objections on the FAR page... Duja► 09:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured Article Review

message: Personally, I like to live in a hilly territory surrounded by a mountain(s). Belgrade seems to be pretty flat and I don't see any mountains around it. That's why I don't like the territory that Belgrade lies on. What Belgrade has is beautiful things such as culture, museums, and stuff like that. I would certainly like to visit those. Again, some people don't like hills or mountains, so I guess it's just a matter of choice. Zagreb for example is pretty flat too, but it has a mountain (forgot which one, I know I saw one mountain), so it does make a difference. Sarajevo is ideal for me, but I wouldn't live in any city in the Balkans, because it reminds me of bad stuff that happened. Overally, Belgrade is a nice city, but I wish you would incorporate more photos in the article. For example, what does overal skyline of Belgrade looks like? This would certainly be a nice photo to include. Also, it would be beneficial for Belgrade and Sarajevo to become twin cities (for the sake of keeping peace for future generations). Bosniak 00:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My opinion about Belgrade 

message: Bg007, I removed the list of authors exhibited in the Museum because 1) it is unsourced 2) even if sourced, pretty much every major museum has something like that, so it's not particularly relevant 3) this is an overview of Belgrade, and not everything should be covered. The place for such details is National Museum of Serbia.
Note that this is a featured article, currently undergoing the review, and I'm trying to keep it as tight to the standards as possible (i.e. everything sourced); I would have much more relaxed attitude otherwise. Your other addition of Belgrade's budget is also unsourced. Duja► 08:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Museum 

message: Added info that during World War I most of offensive occured near Belgrade and short intro into "why" with reference to Gavrilo Princip, see article Belgrade. Hope it doesn't get deleted as it is part of Belgrade's history! Bosniak 05:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belgrade - my contribution 

message: I removed the CoA images, for several reasons:
* Their purpose in the article is purely decorative. They don't even serve that purpose well, with the size of 15-20 pixels: all we see is a smear which resembles a coat of arms; further, they increase the table height.
* While Belgrade municipality coats of arms images are tagged as PD in the respective pages, their PD status is dubious: the Serbian copyright law exempts "Official materials of state bodies and bodies performing public functions", and how this applies to CoAs is questionnable at best; I mark my uploads of similar ones as fair use. As far as I know, a big portion of Serbian municipality CoAs is designed by Serbian Heraldry Society "White Eagle", which makes kind of contracts with the municipalities.
* While country flags might have certain informative value (which is also doubtful, but I let them be), sister CoA images are also purely decorative; no reader can be reasonably expected to be familiar with them. I didn't check their copyright status, but it's unlikely that all are under a GFDL-compatible license.
Duja► 07:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coats of Arms