Talk:International recognition of Kosovo/Archive 42

Archive 35

←

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

Archive 43

101 or 103 states?

http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/kosovo-battles-to-boost-recognition-tally

One more article fuels the confusion about the recognition-number!!! 101,102,103??? 79.233.79.204 (talk) 15:39, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Non-subscribers cannot see anything more than the headline for that article, but all the headline seems to be saying is that Kosovo is trying to confirm what the count really is. I don't see much useful or insightful here: the wiki article alreadt pretty well spells out that some recognitions are debated. There's also a million news articles that play it safe by saying "more than 90 countries" recognize Kosovo, but those don't really add any useful information either. I'm not really sure what this subtopic is really trying to address as far as the wikipedia article is concerned: Taiwan/RoC and the Knights of Malta are listed as recognizing Kosovo, even though Kosovo does not count those in its official tally. Konchevnik81 (talk) 18:05, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TEH RECOGNITION COUNT FOR KOSOVO ON VARIOUS WEBSITES DOESN'T ALL MATCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS MUST BE SOME SORT OF CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ahem. There, see how silly that looks? There are many reasons these counts might vary, the simplest being that people are lazy. Just relax and try not to worry so dang much, okay buddy? --Khajidha (talk) 19:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

• In the first sentences we have: „As of 29 June 2013, the Republic of Kosovo has received 105 diplomatic recognitions as an independent state. Notably, 103 out of 193 (53.4%) United Nations (UN) member states, 23 out of 28 (82%) European Union (EU) member states, 24 out of 28 (86%) NATO member states, and 34 out of 57 (60%) Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member states have recognised Kosovo.” If we really not sure about number of recognitions, we shouldn’t put only one number. I suggest to change it for something like: „As of 29 June 2013, the Republic of Kosovo has received 102 to 105 diplomatic recognitions as an independent state. Notably, 100 to 103 out of 193 United Nations (UN) member states, 23 out of 28 (82%) European Union (EU) member states, 24 out of 28 (86%) NATO member states, and 34 out of 57 (60%) Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member states have recognised Kosovo.” With note that Nigeria, Uganda and Sao Tome & Principe recognitions are disputable. Aotearoa (talk) 07:04, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

That's too messy. We should maybe just say something like "the Republic of Kosovo is reported to have received 105...". That still leaves a little room for doubt. Bazonka (talk) 10:57, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

To Bazonka: I like your proposal. Does anyone object to implementing it? --Khajidha (talk) 12:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Like I said before, the Kosovan MFA still hasn't confirmed the recognition from Tanzania despite the vote in favour of recognition in the Tanzanian Parliament. Guyana recognised in March 2013, however the Kosovan MFA only confirmed last month in June. Sometimes it takes time for a recognition to be confirmed. Not to mention that the Kosovan MFA are a clueless and useless set of %@$&!s It would be helpful if the bothered to update their website. They just sit there are expect the recognitions to come rolling in. It is Behgjet Pacolli who does all the hard work lobbying, he is the one who went to Tanzania and got them to recognise. Enver Hoxhaj is more interested in establishing diplomatic relations with useless countries like Fiji and Afghanistan. He hates the fact that Behgjet Pacolli is taking all the credit for the recognitions and not the Foreign Ministry, probably hence why they aren't bothering to chase up Pacolli's recognitions from countries such as Tanzania. This begs the question, why isn't Behgjet Pacolli Foreign Minister instead of useless Enver Hoxhaj? On another note, I support Bazonka's proposal. IJA (talk) 13:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

CLARIFICATION????

http://www.kosovothanksyou.com/

The founder of this website wrote me,that the mentioned number in this article,101,is valid because Tanzania and El Salvador have not yet sent the official recognition-notes! He told me,that all other recognitions like Nigeria,Uganda,Sao Tome etc.... are still guilty and confirmed.hmmmmmm,ok,maybe this is true,i don´t know it! 79.233.80.90 (talk) 11:40, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Other recognitions are still "guilty and confirmed"? What the heck does that mean? And why are you still shouting? (Using capital letters and exclamation points for no reason) --Khajidha (talk) 15:04, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

As the person appears to come from Germany I expect by 'guilty' he is getting confused with 'gültig' which means 'valid'. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 00:00, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

A country can recognise and yet still not send an "official" note to the Kosovo authorities. Recognition is an internal matter. Sure, it's polite and probably a diplomatically sensible approach to send such a note, but it's not absolutely necessary. (Oh and Sascha, as far as I'm aware, you're still blocked from editing Wikipedia, so you need to be very careful with what you say and how you behave here, or I won't hesitate to report your sockpuppeting again. Less of the shouting please.) Bazonka (talk) 16:14, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I am not afraid of you,Bazonka,you Wannabe-Wikipedia-dictator!!! who do you think you are????? i am a free man and i write what i want!! 79.233.80.90 (talk) 19:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Well I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt... but not after that rant. Bazonka (talk) 19:26, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I propose to remove Uganda from the list simply because there is too much ambiguity surrounding its purported recognition. We do have the letter from the President to Mr. Pacolli, but it is mostly diplomatic platitudes and reads like a courtesy 'thanks for dropping by' letter rather than a formal statement. "...we are behind other countries that have recognized the Republic of Kosovo" is not conclusive. It's my understanding from the other media reports we have seen since that the US government has never confirmed the recognition, either. Their number of recognitions is always lower than what we list.

Also, I propose the removal of Nigeria. We have never seen any formal statement from that government and all we have is Mr. Pacolli's word for it. While I don't doubt him, one would have thought that an official communiqué of some kind would have since emerged. Personally, I've never been comfortable with Nigeria's (or Uganda's) inclusion on the list owing to the lack of information. As discussed above, El Salvador is also similarly lacking in information.

Sao Tome and Principe should, however, stay. There is a Note Verbale from that government extending recognition. There has been no official retraction of it by a subsequent communication, other than the President saying he didn't like it. Regardless of whether the internal process was botched, without an official withdrawal of recognition, it stands.

I propose that a new category of states be created to include these inconclusive cases. We have a "disputed" section, although I don't think that term correctly describes their status. It's more of a case of "We're not sure and nobody's clearing it up." We could perhaps call it "Claimed," "Purported," or "Unverified" recognitions? My own preference would be for "Claimed, but Unverified." - ILBobby (talk) 23:25, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

@ ILBobby Even though there is ambiguity over Uganda's and Nigeria's recognition of Kosovo, they are still listed by the MFA as having recognised Kosovo. Uganda and Nigeria have had plenty of time to deny the recognition but they haven't done this (at least not to public knowledge). It would be ridiculous for Wikipedia to not list them whilst the MFA does. These recognitions are disputed and the article reflects this with the disclaimer/ note.

Creating a new category would be opening Pandora's Box and would create all sorts of problems, therefore I'm against such a proposal. The three disputed recognitions are all listed by the MFA but because they're disputed we have a disclaimer/ note on the article notifying our audience/ readers that the recognitions are disputed. I believe this to be fair and reasonable. IJA (talk) 08:17, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Uganda

I thought I'd raise this before people go ape-s**t crazy and starting editing the article. This is from B92 today. "Thanking Uganda for its principled support of Serbia's territorial integrity and sovereignty, Mrkić said that Uganda does not intend to change its stance on Kosovo and Metohija... During his meeting with Serbian President Tomislav Nikolić in Belgrade Monday, the Ugandan minister said that the African country will continue to support Serbia's stance concerning the Kosovo issue... Nikolić thanked his guest for the principled stance of Uganda not to recognize Kosovo". The Kosovo MFA says that Uganda recognises Kosovo but nowhere in the note verbale does it actually say that Uganda has recognised Kosovo. IJA (talk) 14:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The note verbale certainly looks like a recognition to me, as it is addressed to the government of Kosovo, refers to "your country", and contains the sentence "we are behind other nations that have recognized the Republic of Kosovo". I suppose it could be a fake document, but it looks real enough. Or are Mrkić and Kutesa just talking rubbish? Or have the Ugandans changed their stance? Bazonka (talk) 16:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Why does the article quote Mrkić about Uganda's stance? Can Kutesa not speak for himself and his government? Until we have something from Uganda itself or from Kosovo saying that the recognition is rescinded/was invalid/never happened we should just ignore this. --Khajidha (talk) 16:38, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Not a direct quotation, but the article says "the Ugandan minister said that the African country will continue to support Serbia's stance concerning the Kosovo issue". Bazonka (talk) 16:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I think that in cases like this we must insist on a direct quotation. --Khajidha (talk) 17:03, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The Note verbale doesn't explicitly state that Uganda recognises Kosovo unlike some of the other Note Verbales we have seen. I did notice that B92 once again failed to quote the visiting minister and only quoted Serbian politicians. They like do like to put words into other people's mouths. Perhaps Kutesa didn't want to embarrass Nikolic and Mrkic after they said they thanked Uganda over Kosovo, it would have been awkward had Kutesa said to them "sorry mate, we recognised Kosovo last February, we thought you knew" especially after they both thanked him. Of course this is only speculation and there is a reason why we have a disputed section as some of these recognitions seem (at least to me) a bit iffy. IJA (talk) 17:05, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

If Uganda supports Kosovo's independence it is the foreign ministers job to say so! His job would be to say in a polite manner "Mates, We support Kosovo independence! And not nearly as much as you do with your border guards and customs agents and ambassador pavicevic and your plan to abolish all of Serbia's political parties in Kosovo and replace them with a Kosovo Serb political party!" You also could never ever embarrass Nikolic and Mrkic about supporting Kosovo independence as few support it as much as they do! Qwerty786 (talk) 02:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Dude, are you STILL going on about this ridiculous "Serbia recognizes Kosovo" thing? As has been explained to you over and over and over and over, whenever Serbian officials have been directly asked "Do you recognize Kosovo's independence?" the answer has always been and still is "No". With recognition, the statement is all that matters. Whatever Serbia does, as long as the Serb government says it isn't recognition, it is still not recognition. I don't know what is so hard for you to understand about this. --Khajidha (talk) 02:46, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Redacted Ermir Ismaili (talk) 19:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

it's not ridiculous Serbia says Kosovo can be in the eu and that is for independent nations and don't give me Denmark and Greenland because Greenland was not self proclaimed indepenent and still isn't and Serbia is abolishing all it's courts and Political parties and police and set up border guards and customs agents and sent an ambassador to pristina! The Fact is that even if Uganda doesn't recognize Kosovo does Uganda have an ambassador in pristina like Serbia does? Who is the dejan pavicevic of Uganda in Kosovo? There is no Ugandan dejan pavicevic! the Serbian government has put out official statements that "lies were told kosovo is a part of Serbia" does Uganda say "lies were told Kosovo is a part of Serbia"?Qwerty786 (talk) 23:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Serbia has not sent an ambassador, they have sent a liaison officer. The "lies were told" statement was not made as an official statement, but as a personal opinion. Again, when has Serbia ever expressly stated that "Kosovo is independent"? When has Serbia ever said that Pavicevic is an ambassador? Your interpretation that these actions and statements are equivalent to recognition is simply original research. Official Serbian statements say that they aren't recognition, so they aren't recognition. Only the Serbian government can say what countries they recognize and the Serbian government has repeatedly stated that they do not, have not and will not recognize Kosovo. THAT is all that matters. --Khajidha (talk) 23:56, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

the constitution of Serbia says Kosovo is a province of Serbia but president of Serbia nikolic said explicitly that he is not president in pristina! Because obviously there is a non constitutional recognition by all Serbian leaders that Kosovo is an independent nation. Dejan pavicevic said it was a nation. Mrkic said pavicevic can be called an ambassador. Once again who is Uganda's dejan pavicevic in Kosovo? Qwerty786 (talk) 00:11, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Nikolic's statement was not given as an official position of the Serbian government. A nation is not necessarily an independent state. Mrkic was making a joke. You are taking things out of context and synthesizing and interpreting them in a way that is not supported by the sources. --Khajidha (talk) 09:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

it is the official policy of nikolic that as president of Serbia he is not president in pristina even though the Serbian constitution says he is because it is described as a province of Serbia over which the president has responsibility. But nikolic official policy is that he is not president there! He is deciding to rewrite the constitution unilaterally and change serbias borders! So this controversy over Uganda is ridiculous. Qwerty786 (talk) 16:37, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

But that isn't his official policy, that is his personal statement. --Khajidha (talk) 16:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

it is not just a statement. It is his view that as president of Serbia he is not president in pristina and he acts that way -he acts that way- even though the constitution says Kosovo is a part of Serbia! So why wouldn't he be president in pristina? He is the President of Serbia in pristina and could try to go there and meet with the citizens of his country! But no! His policy is that he is not president there! Qwerty786 (talk) 06:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

From the same article in which Nikolić says that he is "not president in Pristina": Nikolić also decisively rejected the possibility of Serbia recognizing Kosovo's independence under any conditions. (from http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics.php?yyyy=2013&mm=05&dd=31&nav_id=86462 ) That pretty much negates EVERYTHING you are saying. --Khajidha (talk) 22:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think so because of the fact that saying Serbia will not recognize Kosovo independence doesn't mean Serbia isn't acting like It is. Nikolic saying he is not president in pristina even though the constitution says he is and he acts like he isn't and that's his policy means Kosovo is independent he just won't formally say it is. But Serbia does recognize Kosovo independence but in an informal nature. like if Serbia opposed Kosovo independence nikolic would say he is president in pristina. Qwerty786 (talk) 21:39, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Remember WP:NOTFORUM - this thread is about Uganda. You are massively off-topic. Just let it rest. Bazonka (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I started out about Uganda and Uganda being thanked for opposing Kosovo independence. Uganda has released statements supporting Kosovo independence and being thought to oppose Kosovo independence. This is very similar to Serbia itself. When it appointed an official envoy to pristina and set up customs agents and border guards on it's boundary with Kosovo. Serbia and Uganda are equal. Kosovo is indepenent of Serbia but not an indepenent country. It's a nation within Serbia so says pavicevic. Nikiloic isnt president there etc. Qwerty786 (talk) 05:50, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

We've had other instances where the Serbian media put words in the mouths of other people - such as with Guinea-Bissau and Oman. The letter Bazkona references fairly explicitly conveys, at minimum, de facto recognition, referencing "the Republic of Kosovo." I have no reason to doubt its authenticity - if it were a fake, the Ugandans would've loudly said so by now. I would await further clarification from the Ugandans on this. - ILBobby (talk) 18:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The Serbian media/politicians constantly put words in other peoples' mouths and only a small fraction of that is done in regards to Kosovo. Try browsing the english version of B92 for a few days and you'll see for yourself. I would not take take them seriously.Ermir Ismaili (talk) 07:32, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Table of Contents

Is there some way we can get rid of 4.States and its subheadings 4.1 A - 4.18 Z while also moving 4.19 Other states and entities back to 3.2.2? I swear that the small TOC for nonrecognizers didn't used to do this to the main TOC but the page history doesn't back me up on that. The small, alphabetic TOC is useful but should not be listed in the main TOC. --Khajidha (talk) 15:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done. I presume these recent changes to {{Compact_ToC}} broke it. TDL (talk) 15:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah, that would explain it. The old revisions would just have the template name, but looking at them would actually use the changed template. --Khajidha (talk) 17:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Grenada recognises the Republic of Kosovo

Kosovar Foreign Minister Enver Hoxhaj announced earlier on Twitter the recognisition of the Republic of Kosovo by Grenada: Tweet by Enver Hoxhaj. The news has since been spreading on the Kosovar media Telegrafi, Koha, Zëri, Gazeta Express and so on. Kosovar (talk) 15:45, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I've updated it. IJA (talk) 17:24, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

"Libya's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence" proposed move to "Kosovo–Libya relations"

Please can you voice your opinions here. Regards IJA (talk) 19:20, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Libya

Apparently Libya has also recognised Kosovo. [1] and [2] We should wait for more confirmation. IJA (talk) 17:24, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Telegrafi is reporting it, too [3] - ILBobby (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Here's a Libyan story about it [4] - ILBobby (talk) 18:48, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Thailand - UN hat-trick

As promised, the UN hat-trick is complete with the recognition of Kosova by the Kingdom of Thailand. FM Enver Hoxhaj announced the news and it is now being reported by the Kosovar media, such as Telegrafi or RTK Kosovar (talk) 20:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC) Thailand is in the recognition bracket twice, as number 104 and 107. 13GravBr ([User talk: 13GravBr|talk]) 17:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Moving the Thailand entry from non-recognizers to here until something can by done with it. --Khajidha (talk) 23:31, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

| Thailand || In February 2008, Thailand was awaiting the decision of the UNSC.
In March 2012, Thai deputy prime minister, Yuthasak Sasiprapha, said that he was following the developments in the Balkans and Kosovo and that steps will be taken to facilitate travel by Kosovo's citizens in Thailand. In a 12 March 2012 interview after his visit to Bangkok, Albanian deputy prime minister and Foreign Minister, Edmond Haxhinasto, said that Thai authorities have made the first steps toward the recognition of Kosovo. In a 5 May 2012 meeting between the Foreign Ministers of Thailand and Kosovo, Surapong Tovichakchaikul and Enver Hoxhaj, Mr. Surapong said that recognition of Kosovo would be seriously considered by his country, and that there would soon be positive news for Kosovo. He added that Kosovo's independence has contributed to peace and security in the region and Europe. On 6 May 2012, Thai Deputy Foreign Minister, Jullapong Nonsrichai told Hoxhaj that very soon the two countries would enter into diplomatic relations. In a November 2012 meeting with Hoxhaj, Mr. Jullapong said that his government has a positive position on the recognition of Kosovo and that he personally has knowledge that the recognition is on its way and is interested in collaboration between the two countries. |-

Do we have enough for a stand alone article? IJA (talk) 09:42, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

New Map

How hard is for us to make the map, similar something like this from BBC "http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24464020", where the country's name will appear as you hover with the mouse in top of them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.65.168.73 (talk) 08:11, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

It's doable, although it would be an awful lot of work to get 195 or so names to appear in such a small map when the mouse hovers over a country. Also, unlike the BBC map provided it wouldn't really provide much information besides a country name; and all the relevant information is already provided in tables within the article. Doesn't really seem worth it just because a user might not know where Zimbabwe is unless the map tells them. It doesn't look like similar international recognition articles bother with this map feature either.Konchevnik81 (talk) 14:28, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I may be confusing this with another feature, but my impression was that image annotations are disabled on enwiki [5].—Emil J. 14:51, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

It's not terribly common, but it does seem to be out there, for example at States_and_union_territories_of_India. That at least brings up the name and the wiki article link when you hover the mouse over a state, but I would also admit that I'm not 100% sure that it's the same thing as annotation. As far as I can see no foreign policy/international relations articles with maps bother with anything like this though. Konchevnik81 (talk) 15:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

The map at the Indian states article is an image map. The actual image doesn't contain links; these are added by MediaWiki's image map extension. SiBr₄ ⚑ 15:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

The Indian states map works because it's possible to fit the states, at a recognisable size, into a reasonably sized image. That doesn't work so well with a world map; how can we neatly pinpoint hundreds of small and large countries (and various territorial quirks) on an image that's still small enough to fit into the rest of the article? It would take a lot of effort for modest benefit - we can get much better ROI elsewhere. (But, hey, this is a volunteer project and everybody has different ideas about where their effort is best applied) bobrayner (talk) 23:47, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Republic of Kosovo

There are some rather important discussions going on at Talk:Republic of Kosovo and I would like to give all the opportunity to give their input into these discussions. IJA (talk) 11:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

New article help please

I am planning to create a new article called Kosovan local elections, 2013. I think it will be considered a very notable article due to the build up to it, the participation of Serbs, the results and the violence which occurred in Northern Kosovo. If you would like to help me establish this article then please message me on my talk page. All are welcome. IJA (talk) 19:00, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

"Yet another step towards full recognition"

Text near-identical to the following one:

None the less, in November, 2013, the Serb government took yet another step towards full recognition of the Republic of Kosovo.<ref>{{cite news|title=|url=http://www.glasamerike.net/content/kosovo-eu/1621525.html|date=November 5, 2013}}</ref>

was added to about 20 Kosovo-related articles [6] by Cognoscerapo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) around 5 November. Even a casual view to his contributions reveals that he's a pro-Kosovar POV-pusher (likely a sockpuppet) who is WP:NOTHERE to build the encyclopedia, so I just rolled back most of his edits. Just because something is "sourced" is not a sufficient reason to keep the text. The sentence above has zero informational value, not explaining in a single word which step would that be, and according to whom this untold something represents a step towards full recognition. The cited text actually does not support the sentence: it is a run-of-the-mill press conference statement (Translation) by Kosovo leader Hashim Thaci, which naturally proclaims a "[near] agreement on the full normalization of relations between [Republic of] Kosovo and Serbia." Thus, nothing to see here. No such user (talk) 07:39, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

That sentence is just the opinion of a journalist called Budimir Ničić, it is of no use to this article. This is an encyclopaedia, we deal with facts not the opinions of journalists. IJA (talk) 13:49, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

It is not even that; the journalist did not express any particular opinion, and even Thaci did not go as far as to formulate it as "step towards full recognition" (and why should Thaci give a damn whether Serbia recognizes Kosovo, as long as the UN and other relevant bodies would do it first). The statement is completely falsified. I'm sure that statements similar to the one above could be dug out if one searches the media hard enough, and cherry-picks the quote, but we should not build our articles on partisan positions. No such user (talk) 14:44, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. The article doesn't mention anything about recognition. Tacking a random link on the end of a sentence doesn't make the claim sourced. Also, adding the word "yet" to the sentence "The Government of Serbia does not recognise it as a sovereign state" is inappropriate as it implies that Serbia will eventually recognize. It isn't our place to take a position on that. It would equivalent to saying "Kosovo has not yet returned to Serbian control." TDL (talk) 18:45, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Sao Tome

If the govt of the country says no, then no amount of disagreement can Kosovo can change that. Kosovo doesn't control Sao Tome's policy, Sao Tome does. So clearly the recognistion was null and voi.d kosovos wish to inflate recognition numbers is not going to change the fact that there wasn't recognition, or rescinded recognition(Lihaas (talk) 09:00, 15 January 2014 (UTC)).

Go away and read the archives. IJA (talk) 20:44, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Nigeria, Uganda

What happened with Nigerian and Ugandan recognitions, in the end? They were apparently contested, and an anon just removed them. I'm reluctant to revert, as apparently there is at least some ground for that removal. No such user (talk) 18:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I haven´t removed them! I simply wanted to start a legitimate discussion,why Thaci quotes 105 recognitions,while this site has 107. This discussion is necessary.Something is wrong with two states and i personally don´t know whether or not they are Nigeria and Uganda. Sao Tome is also possible. The main problem is,that the MFA-Kosovo-website has only 96 states on it´s actual list,because the site has not been updated for almost 13 months!!! The Kosovo-MFA must clarify. Sascha,Germany84.171.42.197 (talk) 21:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

And the justification that was previously provided, that the recognitions of El Salvador and Tanzania were not being counted because they hadn't been confirmed in a note verbale, is no longer true. Every time a state has recognized in the last year or so, it is reported (both by the media and Kosovar authorities) at 2 less then what we have. We've clearly got something wrong, but unfortunately since there are three candidates (Sao Tome/Uganda/Nigeria) it isn't clear what to do about it... TDL (talk) 00:32, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

We can't be doing WP:Original Research and we can't be guessing either. We have the disputed tags, that's sufficient. IJA (talk) 20:18, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

So, maybe this list is one big OR, isn’t it? Is any source confirm this list? Is this list based on the Third-party sources? I don’t think – as I see in the references, most of them are primary sources. You should prepare this list in accordance with Wikipedia policy, not with yourselves imagination about this list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.68.64.18 (talk) 14:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Read the page you linked to at primary sources: "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the source but without further, specialized knowledge." Using the notes verbale or other direct announcements of recognition to compile a list of countries that have recognized Kosovo is a completely valid use of such sources. --Khajidha (talk) 12:18, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

In a interview for Kosovo's media [7] (3:00), Kosovan MFA Enver Hoxhaj said that Nigeria and Uganda are in process of confirmation of their act to recognise Kosovo. Their recognition are 'pending to confirmation from their MFA' said Hoxhaj. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.43.156 (talk) 22:28, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Well,we can discuss again and again,but this official Kosovo-MFA-list is decisive. They must simply update it,that´s the problem.

http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=1,33

Sascha,Germany, 84.171.36.249 (talk) 08:04, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

The list is based on Primary and Secondary sources. IJA (talk) 13:24, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Tonga

Kosovar media are reporting that Tonga has recognised the independence of the Republic of Kosovo: Koha. Gazeta Express, Zëri. No word from the Kosovar MFA yet though. Kosovar (talk) 15:30, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Enver Hoxhaj, the Kosovar foreign minister, tweeted about the news though [8] and so did the Kosovar prime minister. Kosovar (talk) 15:47, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

The MFA has retweeted Hoxhaj's tweet about the recognition. I don't think that they'd do that if there were no substance to it. Bazonka (talk) 18:23, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

105 OR 107????

http://www.balkaneu.com/recognition-kosovo-2014-105-countries-total/

Hi friends, we have 107 states in the list,but Thaci says 105. So which two states are still disputed? thank you. Sascha,Germany84.171.44.54 (talk) 19:53, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Well the problem is,that the Kosovo-MFA is largely incompetent!!! They could clarify the real number,but they are not updating their list. 96,105,106,107,no one knows the actual number of official recognitions. Sascha,Germany, 84.171.42.197 (talk) 08:58, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=1,33

Be careful Sascha. — Bazonka (talk) 10:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Kosovar Ministry of Foreign Affairs received note verbale on Monday. We must change the date of the recognition to 15 January 2014: [9]. Kosovar (talk) 10:15, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Tonga media reporting it has not been confirmed, 21 January: [10] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.248.35.180 (talk) 12:56, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Burma

Kosovo media reporting recognition from Burma [11] - ILBobby (talk) 07:49, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

http://lajmi.net/myanmari-njohu-pavaresine-e-kosoves/

Yes,Myanmar is number 106,according to the official MFA-sources. So again we have two countries in the list,which haven´t recognized Kosovo so far! My favourites for these two positions are Sao Tome and Nigeria! Sascha,Germany 84.171.17.150 (talk) 09:26, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Not so fast...

Myanmar has not recognised Kosovo

"PRISTINA - Pristina on Friday denied reports by local media that Myanmar has recognised Kosovo's independence, while Internet portals that originally carried the story apologised to readers.
[...]However, the Kosovo ministry of foreign affairs told the Koha.net portal that the recognition has not taken place. No official recognition from Myanmar has been received by the Kosovo government, the Pristina-based Express daily said, "

No such user (talk) 13:15, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

BREAKING NEWS: Serbian government claims today,that only 92 countries have recognized the Kosovo-independence so far!!!! Kosovo claims 104-107 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.171.12.47 (talk) 18:44, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

So, how do continued Serbian denials constitute news? --Khajidha (talk) 13:58, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Lesotho

Kosovar media are reporting that Lesotho has recognised the independence of the Republic of Kosovo: [12] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.102.238 (talk) 09:41, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

News confirmed by Kosovar foreign minister Enver Hoxhaj on Twitter: [13] Kosovar (talk) 09:56, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Again we hear the number 106 recognitions from numerous official Kosovo-Twitter-accounts (Thaci,Hoxhaj,Petrit etc....). Nevertheless we still have 108 states in the list. I want to know,which two states from these 108 have not recognized Kosovo so far??? Nigeria and Sao Tome??? I don´t understand,why the Kosovo-MFA is not clarifying in it´s official list. Last update in late 2012! http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=1,33

Sascha,Germany, 84.171.41.64 (talk) 10:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

@ Sascha, do you have to bring this up everytime a country recognises? We have been through this a million times before. We have disputed notices on the three disputed recognitions. What more can we do without violating WP:OR? If the Kosovan MFA updated their site, it'd be useful but they haven't therefore there is nothing we can do about it. On our list, we can only go on the information we have at present. It isn't our job to investigate. IJA (talk) 12:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Here is some Italian news on Lesotho's recognition. [14] IJA (talk) 12:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Vatican recognized Kosovo?

Vatican Foreign Ministry has contacted Kosovo Foreign Ministry with a letter regarding a land dispute.

Normally, countries that don't recognize do not make such official contact with the unrecognized foreign ministry which it's the representation of Kosovo as a state. Vatican's contact is a tacit recognition of Kosovo's sovereignty as well.

http://www.koha.net/?id=27&l=2518 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.109.14.121 (talk) 23:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Countries can talk to whoever they want. It doesn't mean they consider them a state. CMD (talk) 23:29, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. The article about the state is now at the "Kosovo" title. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:30, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

---

International recognition of Kosovo → International recognition of the Republic of Kosovo – The current title is not neutral, "Kosovo" could also refer to the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija, which is competing with the Republic of Kosovo for recognition. Charles Essie (talk) 22:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose Various divisions of sovereign states do not compete for recognition. Their recognition is vested in that of their state, which more of less deals with them according to domestic laws. CMD (talk) 22:50, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose The so-called APKiM (which exists only in name) is not competing for recognition, therefore the proposing user's argument is flawed. Also this article tells us that some countries consider Kosovo as being apart of Serbia and that the recognise Serbia's territorial integrity over Kosovo, making the current article title more appropriate than the proposed title which would be a WP:FORK. IJA (talk) 13:43, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose per conciseness. The current title unambiguously identifies the subject since only one political entity in Kosovo (the Republic of Kosovo) seeks or has received diplomatic recognition. Also see WP:POVNAME/WP:POVNAMING for why neutrality doesn't trump clarity and the common name. TDL (talk)
• Support per WP:CRITERIA. I would propose to add year of proclamation of independence because there were two Republics of Kosovo which proclaimed independence and by addition of 2008 it would be clear what entity this article refers to.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:08, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, WP:CRITERIA is the policy which governs article titles, but you haven't explained how WP:CRITERIA supports the move.

Also, it's pretty clear that recognition of the 2008 state is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. And besides, as far as I can tell there is no article on international recognition of the 1990 state so there is no need to disambiguate. TDL (talk) 23:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Its pretty clear. There were more than one Kosovo entities that gained partial international recognition so the proposed name is more precise, natural and recognizable than the existing one. Disambiguation would be useful because there is an article about the 1990 Kosovo state.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

"There were more than one Kosovo entities"? Only one actually exists. Pretending otherwise is an obvious failure of both WP:V and WP:NPOV. We don't need to disambiguate from ghosts and fantasies. bobrayner (talk) 00:19, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

You've missed the point. Recognition of the 2008 state is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, hence disambiguation with superfluous precision is not helpful. Do you think that Republic of Kosovo should be moved to Republic of Kosovo (2008) to disambiguate it as well?

And how does adding the formal name and date of declaration (which most readers probably don't even know) make the title more natural or recognizable? Do you really think people are going to type "International recognition of the Republic of Kosovo declared in 2008" into the search bar more frequently than the current title? Do you really think that people use that phrase when speaking more frequently than the current title? I think not. To the layman, Republic of Kosovo=Kosovo. "recognition of the Republic of Kosovo" gets no google news hits, while "recognition of Kosovo" gets hundreds. TDL (talk) 00:32, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. bobrayner (talk) 01:10, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Two different Republics of Kosovo proclaimed independence. Both of them have their articles on wikipedia. Both of them gained partial international recognition. That is why it would be useful to follow WP:CRITERIA and clarify what entity this article refers to (by its renaming to 2008 RoK). I think I gave fairly clear reason for my position and don't have anything else to add to it for now. You are, of course, free to disagree with me but you can not expect me to be somehow obliged to keep discussing with you here as long as you disagree with me. This is my last comment in this discussion.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:54, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

This argument seems rather difficult to reconcile with the facts on the ground - there is only one republic of Kosovo, in reality. It is also difficult to reconcile with Antidiskriminator's own edits which previously played down any recognition of Kosovo's first attempt at declaring independence, and removed text about partial recognition. It is, of course, entirely coincidental that Antidiskriminator's radical about-face on this obscure bit of history happens at the same time as an opportunity to emphasise that "Kosovo" and the "Republic of Kosovo" are different things. bobrayner (talk) 15:32, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, you explained your position clearly, but you've failed to explain how your position is based on policy. Of course, you're not under any obligation to provide a policy based rational for your opinion, but consensus is found by evaluating the strength of policy based arguments, not opinions. Citing WP:CRITERIA, when the policy doesn't support the point you are arguing, doesn't make it a policy based argument. TDL (talk) 19:20, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose There is only one "Kosovo" that has international recognition so it should be obvious what the title refers to. There is no need for disambiguation terms when there are no other articles with similar names. Bazonka (talk) 21:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect. The first Republic of Kosovo was recognized by Albania.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

It is only semantics if those are two different republics of Kosovo; the later one is just a second attempt by pretty much the same actors (the first one was rather lame, as it did not have any practical sovereignity, along the lines of various "Republic of Krajina in exile"), but now in a much different environment. Whatever the case, the second one is by and large more important WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and the first one can be covered by a hatnote (Republic of Kosova is rather poor way of disambiguation, btw.) So that line of reasoning is hardly going to convince anybody about the need for disambiguation. No such user (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

The 'Republic of Kosova' (stupid way to disambiguate) is a historic proclaimed state. It is fairly obvious that "International recognition of Kosovo" is referring to contemporary Kosovo, not historic Kosovo. The same way the article "Economy of Serbia" is referring to contemporary Serbia and not the "Kingdom of Serbia" or the "Principality of Serbia (medieval)". IJA (talk) 22:14, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

• Match the outcome of this Requested Move Articles on aspects of states should use the same title as the main state article; this consistency is the least confusing for readers and usually helps cut the amount of back and forthing on names. What "Kosovo" refers to should be sorted out there and this article should follow it. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose: "Kosovo" is the "region" in general context and the common name of the region (for THOUSANDS years!). When the context is the context of countries, "Republic of Kosovo" may be shorthened/abbreviated as "Kosovo". As long as the context mentioned and covered is clear to make a separation between the "region (Kosovo)" and "Republic of Kosovo"; for the things related with "Republic of Kosovo", "Kosovar/Kosovo" may be used to refer the country.
  

"General" context is much bigger than the "countries" context. Outside of the context of "countries", "Kosovo" is not the common name of the state ("Republic of Kosovo"), but the common name of the "region" in "general" context. In universal naming standards, the "GENERAL" context is much bigger than and far overrides the "COUNTRIES" context. In universal naming standards, the bigger entity always takes the name. The entity "region of Kosovo" (with thousands of years of history) is much bigger than the entity "Republic of Kosovo" (with in the baby-hood years). Look for example, "Ireland" is used for the region (island) in Wikipedia.

"Kosovo" is the common name of the "region" (the "region" and the "country (Republic of Kosovo)" are not coterminous): "Kosovo" is NOT the common name of the "country (Republic of Kosovo)" in "general" context:

A. History: 1. Colarodo State University; "A Short History of Kosovo" 2. "Kosovo's Conflict" 3. "History, bloody history" 4. Lonely Planet, "History" B. Art: 1. Art of Living, "Prison Kosovo" C. Culture: 1. "Kosovo: History and Culture" D. Geography: 1. Florida State University, "International Boundary Study:Bulgaria – Yugoslavia Boundary" 2.Marxists; "The national Question in Yugoslavia" 3. SoftSchools; "Kosovo Geography" E. People: 1. NATO; "Kosovo Refugee Problem".

But on the other hand, when the context is restricted to "country", definitely, "Kosovo" refers to the country. Hence, "International Recognition of Kosovo" must be kept!. The "International Recognition" in the title definitely shows the context is the context of countries!Alexyflemming (talk) 13:17, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Greece To Recognize Kosovo?

The Head of the Greek Liason Office in Kosovo said that all the countries of the EU should recognize Kosovo. http://inserbia.info/news/2014/03/greece-to-recognize-kosovo/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.102.238 (talk) 10:24, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

He now claims his words were misinterpreted: [15]. TDL (talk) 21:41, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Russia: Kosovo's Declaration of Independence is legal?!

Russian MFA now expressed that the Declaration of Independence of Kosovo is legal and not violated international law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.60.208 (talk) 00:40, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Source? --Khajidha (talk) 17:49, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Slovakia

Slovakia's newly elected president Andrey Kiska calls for recognition of Kosovo's independence.

http://medialne.etrend.sk/televizia/fico-a-kiska-uz-opakuju-dookola-to-iste-ta3-ukoncila-debatu-skor.html

http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2014&mm=03&dd=30&nav_category=78&nav_id=830326

Yep, new elected President of Slovakia is pro Kosovo recognition.[16] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.60.57 (talk) 10:28, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I added a note to Slovakia's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence. TDL (talk) 19:34, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Nigeria precedent - San Tome

I see that Nigeria was removed from the list of recognition after the declaration of Nigeria MFA in Abuja. Last year President and Prime Minister of STP said that the recognition is not valid, because according STP's Constitution the verbal note is invalid if is it were not firmed by President or approved by Parliament of the country.

Now Nigeria is a precedent for STP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.60.57 (talk) 22:24, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

STP's government recognized Kosovo (no doubt about that, they sent a note verbale), however they seemed not to have followed the procedures the legal framework of STP demands for such a step to be valid. However, it can be claimed that squabbles about the internal procedures have no relevance with respect to international law. That's why STP is still in the list (with the footnote explaining that it's recognition is challenged). In the case of Nigeria, however, it is not entirely clear that any recognition took place at all - now the foreign minister explicitly stated that Nigeria doesn't recognize Kosovo's independence: End of the story, Nigeria is removed from the list. In my view those two cases are entirely different animals. Gugganij (talk) 12:08, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

haha IJA (talk) 21:39, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

??? Gugganij (talk) 10:19, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I didn't find your comment amusing Gugganij, I just find the concept of a "Nigeria Precedent" rather funny and ridiculous. IJA (talk) 10:56, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

We'll call it the "have a source precedent". CMD (talk) 11:30, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

106 STATES HAVE RECOGNIZED KOSOVO SO FAR!!!

Hello guys,after the Kosovo-recognition by Lesotho two months ago Hoxhaj,Thaci and Co.... confirmed,that now 106 states have offically recognized Kosovo as an independent state. This means,that your 107-list still has one state,which in reality has not recognized Kosovo so far! So which state is it? Uganda? Sao Tome? Someone else? Thank you in advance,Sascha,Germany, 79.233.43.36 (talk) 07:22, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Find us a reliable source Sascha. If we had one that clarifies the position, then we'll use it. Without one, it is pointless asking the question. Bazonka (talk) 18:25, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

you are not in the position to decide,which questions i and other users ask! We are free people and we can write whatever we want! Sascha,Germany, 79.233.4.130 (talk) 13:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

I suggest you read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Bazonka (talk) 16:19, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

And WP:BLOCK while we are at it. User:Sascha30 was indefinitely blocked for disruption, so you have had your editing privileges revoked. Editing wikipedia is not a right. TDL (talk) 19:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Endless repetition by blocked editor. We all know the maths, and we all know what that implies. When any of us see any sources, I'm sure it'll be mentioned here. Until then this is pointless. CMD (talk) 11:55, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Bazonka,listen! Because of our never-ending private feud you are not willing to understand my mails,you ignore them! I simply said, that the Kosovo-government ITSELF has said,that now at this moment 106 out of 194 independent states on our planet have recognized Kosovo so far as an independent state! However the Wikipedia-list shows 107 countries! 107-106=1!!! This means that we have one country in the list,which in reality has NOT recognized Kosovo as an independent state so far! And as a result of this fact we should search alltogether as PARTNERS,which country it is! My favourite is Sao Tome and Principe,but i havent found clear sources in one way or another! So now i ask all other Kosovo-followers to search as well, because the list is not accurate with this "one country too much". thank you for your attention, Sascha,Germany, 79.233.2.242 (talk) 08:15, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Resolution of the counting discrepancy

In this speech, Hoxhaj said that 33 OIC states have recognize Kosovo, while we claim the number is 34, which would suggest that Uganda is probably the state we erroneously list as recognizing. The MFA article later lists Uganda as a state that has not recognized Kosovo. Given the past dispute over Uganda's recognition (ie [17]) I believe we now have enough to move Uganda to the non-recognizers. Any objections? TDL (talk) 04:22, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

• Weak Support - It isn't watertight but logically I suppose it makes sense. IJA (talk) 08:53, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
• Weak support - It would be good to see a Ugandan source that says that they haven't recognised, or at least a direct quote from a Ugandan official that is published in a neutral source. But in the absence of this, there is certainly enough circumstantial evidence to cast a credible doubt. Bazonka (talk) 09:02, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
• Support - Per TDL. - ILBobby (talk) 11:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
• Strong support – per proposal. 23 editor (talk) 13:55, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
• Comment - The Kosovan MFA recently noted that Uganda hasn't recognised yet, see the last paragraph: [18] IJA (talk) 10:05, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I pointed that out above in my original proposal. (Your source is just the English translation of the one I linked to above.) TDL (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Bus strangely Uganda is still in their list of countries who have recognized. Just shows what a great work they do...

You're probably right anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.15.56.99 (talk) 12:40, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

That list hasn't been updated in years so I don't think it can really be used as evidence for what the current position of the MFA on Uganda's recognition. They listed Mali at one time as well, before removing them after new information emerged. TDL (talk) 00:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

As no one has objected I will go ahead and make the change. TDL (talk) 00:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Togo

ok very good, Sao Tome recognized,Nigeria and Uganda didn´t so far! Today Togo number 107!!! 107 from 194! 87 states remain! Now the list is in accordance with the official number from the Kosovo-government, 107! Finally after so many years of discussion, :) Sascha,Germany 79.233.25.167 (talk) 18:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.233.25.167 (talk)

Seems legit: [19]. TDL (talk) 19:16, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

https://twitter.com/enver_hoxhaj/status/484397553962999809 https://twitter.com/search?q=kosovo%20togo&src=typd http://epapar.blogspot.de/2014/07/togo-recognizes-kosovo-video.html

Sascha,Germany, 79.233.25.167 (talk) 20:02, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

So is someone going to make the edit? - ILBobby (talk) 20:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

I am unable to make the edit, i am sorry! Someone else must do it. Sascha,Germany, 79.233.25.167 (talk) 20:31, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Do we have a reliable, official source yet? Bazonka (talk) 20:50, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

https://twitter.com/enver_hoxhaj/status/484397553962999809 https://twitter.com/search?q=kosovo%20togo&src=typd http://epapar.blogspot.de/2014/07/togo-recognizes-kosovo-video.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.233.25.167 (talk) 21:04, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Twitter and blogs cannot normally be used as WP:RS. The Blic article referenced by TDL above, and this RTK report may be OK, but seem to be mostly rumour at present. I would prefer to see something official from the Kosovo or Togolese governments. Bazonka (talk) 21:14, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=1,4,2381 THE OFFICIAL NEWS NOW ON THE KOSOVO-MFA-WEBSITE!! TOGO 107!!! Sascha, Germany, 79.233.25.167 (talk) 21:30, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Solomon Islands

FM Enver Hoxhaj tweeted that he's been informed that the Solomon Islands have taken the decision to recognize Kosovo [20]. Yes, I know this isn't actionable, but I thought I'd go ahead and put it on our radar. - ILBobby (talk) 04:40, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

SOLOMON ISLANDS 108!!!

https://twitter.com/Petrit The deputy foreign minister has confirmed it as well,and some other sources! http://www.solomonstarnews.com/news/national/3456-solomon-islands-recognizes-kosovo-as-independent-state http://mapo.al/2014/08/ishujt-solomon-njohin-pavaresine-e-kosoves/ http://www.telegrafi.com/lajme/ishujt-solomon-e-kane-njohur-kosoven-2-49218.html Hoxhaj just now confirmed it not only on Twitter,but also on facebook https://www.facebook.com/dr.enverhoxhaj?fref=ts Sascha,Germany, 79.233.35.217 (talk) 05:56, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it's all over twitter and the Kosovo news media are reporting it. I have no objection to the edit being made, but I will not make that call. - ILBobby (talk) 06:02, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

We had many doubtful recognitions in recent years,but the Kosovo has changed it´s attitude and is now more trustworthy.There is no doubt concerning the Solomon-Islands,the links above are numerous and official and the media-coverage is increasing every hour now! Update can be made! Sascha,Germany, 79.233.35.217 (talk) 06:20, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Please don't edit the main page if you don't know what you're doing. - ILBobby (talk) 07:09, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Instead of lamenting about other guys,you should do it yourself! Criticizing others without showing personal courage is very easy! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.233.35.217 (talk) 07:15, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

 Done IJA (talk) 07:46, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Growing recognition of sports federation

Should we include something in the introductory portion of the text on the growing number of international sports federation admitting Kosovo to full membership status? Kosovo became a member of the IOC and other federations, and I think it merits a mention. What do you think?--alchaemia (talk) 09:56, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Anything significantly notable should be included under "International recognition of Kosovo#International non-governmental organisations" such as the IOC, smaller sporting organisations should be covered at Membership of Kosovo in international sports federations. I've added a "see also" section under the "International non-governmental organisations" sub-section. Also remember to sign your comments with ~~~~ please. Regards IJA (talk) 20:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Kosovo note template

Has anyone else noticed that the number of countries displayed as recognising Kosovo is on 107 (as of today) while the Kosovo note template reports 108? Obviously this is not including Taiwan and Military Order Malta. I am not sure how to amend the template so I don't wish to fiddle, but on the whole I cannot be certain which of the two is correct (meaning whether the article is out of date).This comment is posted on both talk pages --Oranges Juicy (talk) 08:50, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

The number of recognisers is held in the Template:Numrec/Kosovo template, called by both this article and the Kosovo Note template. Someone removed Sao Tomé's recognition from this article, and then broke the link to the Numrec template so that it didn't work properly, causing an inconsistency. I've reverted to the last stable version, but I think there is a case to be made for removing Sao Tomé from the recognisers list - they seem to have withdrawn their recognition. If it is to be removed then we must do it properly, without making a mess. Bazonka (talk) 16:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Sao Tomé

Currently we state that Sao Tomé has recognised Kosovo, with a footnote stating that the recognition is disputed. A new source now shows that STP's new government denies recognition: [21]. This seems to be a blog and so may not be RS, but it refers to a formal communication from the new president stating that STP does not recognise Kosovo. If we can find this then I think we can take it to be cast iron evidence of non-recognition. If we cannot find it, then should we leave things as they are (with a possible error in the number of recognisers), or move STP back to the non-recognisers list? Bazonka (talk) 16:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

That link is older that I'd thought. It's from 2013. So perhaps we should leave things as they are. Keen to hear what others think though. Bazonka (talk) 17:00, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I tend to think that they should be moved to the non-recognizers. At one point, when there was internal dispute in STP's government on their position, I think it made sense to list them as recognizing with a footnote. Now that there seems to be consensus by STP's government that they currently do not recognize, I think it's best to move them to the non-recognizers. Obviously there is a question of legality of this position, but de facto they do not recognize and that's what is really important. Depending on whose lawyer you believe, the recognition either never took place, or has been annulled.

That being said, the text currently under STP needs to be rewritten as it is unbalanced, poorly written and makes unsubstantiated claims. For instance, it should clearly be mentioned that Kosovo's reaction has been to insist that the recognition is still valid. (This is in contrast with Mali, which Kosovo acknowledges no longer recognizes.) TDL (talk) 03:31, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

We have the disputed note, that is sufficient and neutral. Also all sources say 108, not 107. IJA (talk) 05:10, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Firstly thank you Bazonka for identifying the problem, which as we now know lies with São Tomé and Príncipe. Theoretically this state is the elephant in the room for us as editors because we cannot be certain to which category it belongs, most of us suspect that STP does not recognise yet the only evidence comes in the form of an unreliable source. Such things cannot generally be ignored because often they hint at the facts, the problem we have is that if it is the case that STP has amended its position then we still may never know for a very long time because relations between STP and Kosovo/Serbia are of low importance to any publisher. It doesn't mean no information exists, it means finding it is difficult. To me STP belongs in its own little third category of "not sure". This source from 2014 says 108 so maybe there is nothing in the STP case, there again it could be cited in pure passing without consideration towards the situation. Nobody knows. All I can say though is that it has nothing to do with neutrality since this is not a contentious debate, it is simply to do with accuracy, do they or don't they. --Oranges Juicy (talk) 06:08, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

"It doesn't mean no information exists, it means finding it is difficult."

I guess São Tomé and Príncipe knows whether or not they recognize Kosovo. Ever considered to simply ask them ? I am almost sure they've got a government, an embassy or two ... and the ability to read an email.46.115.21.161 (talk) 10:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I have sent an email to their Office of Public and International Affairs. However, an emailed response from them would unfortunately still not meet WP:RS unless they published it widely. It'll give us an indication though, and we can always consider whether to apply WP:IAR. Bazonka (talk) 12:57, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

If they do respond, I am in favor of following what they say whether that technically fits our rules or not. --Khajidha (talk) 14:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I've just had a thought! I wouldn't be surprised if the clerks at the embassy didn't know themselves only to find the government cannot remember what it did! DISCLAIMER: Don't take this seriously!. --Oranges Juicy (talk) 15:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I have a copy of the Note Verbale from Sao Tome if anybody's interested. I would think that Sao Tome would have to officially withdraw recognition by a clear act, which to my knowledge it has not done. Loudly complaining about irregularities in the process is an internal issue that does not necessarily impact a formal governmental act. The recognition did not become an issue until there was a change of government in Sao Tome, so the government at the time of recognition believed it had done so properly.

In my own experience, many embassies and ministries do not answer email queries. Calling on the telephone isn't helpful, either, because you usually get a nervous or oblivious staffer who doesn't want to speak without authorization, assures you they will "call you back," and then never does. - ILBobby (talk) 01:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

There was the formal communication issued by the President on the matter which clearly stated that the position of the head of state of STP is that it does not recognize Kosovo. I'm not sure what else could be expected? The new government would not withdraw recognition because in their view it had never (legally) happened. Withdrawing it would have been an endorsement of the legality of the original recognition. Legal semantics aside, the end result is the same: the position of the state was that it did not recognize Kosovo. I don't think how we got there is really important for the purposes of this list. TDL (talk) 03:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

That is interesting - I've not seen it before. The answer to the question would depend upon the role of the president in the country's constitutional order. As you know, there are countries where the president is a figurehead and the PM and cabinet do what they want without reference to the head of state. As an example, I remember in 1999 when the Republic of China established diplomatic relations with Macedonia that the president of Macedonia at the time, Kiro Gligorov, was left out of the process and loudly objected that he did not approve, but the government ignored him. The Saotomean recognition Note was approved by the Cabinet, whereas the statement you link to is from the president. I cannot call myself acquainted with Saotomean constitutional law, so I cannot say who trumps whom. - ILBobby (talk) 05:12, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Neither am I, but with the change in government it really became moot: both branches took the same position that the recognition was not valid. (See quotes from the PM at [22].) TDL (talk) 16:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

LOL the President of the Republic published an official statement saying pretty much "Now-sacked Minister X had issued a invalid decree stating my country recognised Kosovo; as is clearly stated in our constitution, whose text is by the way fully available online, the final authority over foreign policy and diplomatic relations of the country lies with me, the President. Therefore I sacked Minister X, and, just to make sure, even though we have already said it a hundred of times - I have said it, the new PM has said it, our Congress/Parliament have said it, but since the Kosovans insist on saying they were recognised, here am I, publishing an entire, formal Presidential declaration, which says, ten times, that São Tomé and Príncipe does not recognise nor has it ever recognised Kosovo"... and TWO YEARS AFTER THAT (and after two years of São Tomé and Príncipe not letting Kosovo open an embassy in it, or even allowing anyone with a Kosovar passport enter the country, etc) Wikipedia is still "discussing" what to do about the list. Seriously... lol. 191.33.135.252 (talk) 23:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

If our anonymous Brazilian I.P.-using friend would like to sign his or her posts, I'm sure this could turn into a positive conversation. - ILBobby (talk) 03:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't want have a conversation, I don't have time to lose - especially not to discuss something as undiscussable as this (seriously, like, seriously...). You guyts failing to have removed the country whose own President has bothered issuing and publishing an official declaration saying "No, we don't recognise nor have we ever recognised Kosovo" from the list... and wanting to "discuss" it... lol... is what makes people right when they say Wikipedia is not reliable. 191.33.150.141 (talk) 01:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia has to go on what the sources say and SAP's recognition is disputed, we acknowledge that. We have sources saying both positions regarding recognition, hence why we have the dispute note. IJA (talk) 02:37, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Where is this "official declaration". I haven't seen any official source, other than blogs etc. Bazonka (talk) 06:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

@Bazonka: I linked to it above [23]. TDL (talk) 13:41, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Please block the IP.Politik (talk) 09:59, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

LOL "Please block the IP - shut them up before they can prove we're lying and spreading false information, contributing to Wikipedia's lists being completely disregarded by serious academics".

I quote what another user posted above, but seemed to be ignored:

There was the formal communication issued by the President of the Republic of São Tomé and Príncipe http://www.telanon.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/COMUNICADO-da-Presid%C3%AAncia-da-Rep%C3%BAblica1.pdf on the matter which clearly stated that the position of the head of state of STP is that it does not recognize Kosovo. I'm not sure what else could be expected? The new government would not withdraw recognition because in their view it had never (legally) happened. Withdrawing it would have been an endorsement of the legality of the original recognition. Legal semantics aside, the end result is the same: the position of the state was that it did not recognize Kosovo. I don't think how we got there is really important for the purposes of this list. TDL (talk) 03:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

In case you cannot understand the language, let me translate it:

[...]Therefore:

The President of the Republic, relying on the competences/prerrogatives on him constitutionally bestowed over the international relations of the State of São Tomé and Príncipe, by this declaration declares TO THE WORLD that the Democratic Republic of São Tomé and Príncipe has not recognised the sovereignty of the Republic of Kosovo.

All those to whom the topic may concern shall so understand it and act accordingly.

Presidence of the Republic of São Tomé and Príncipe, 7 January 2013.

191.33.150.141 (talk) 16:15, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Well then is everybody satisfied that STP should be removed from the 'recognised' list? Or are there any outstanding objections? --Oranges Juicy (talk) 14:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't know; somehow I still don't think this Presidential Statement was straight-forward enough... Just kidding. It obviously needs changing, go for it :) MissionFix (talk) 16:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Let's await one or two more posts from the other contributors. --Oranges Juicy (talk) 15:48, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree that it should be moved back to the non-recognisers section. Bazonka (talk) 16:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll stick to my principles and agree with what the sources/ references state. However I do believe that the content which is currently in the "disputed section" should remain in the article in some capacity. Also we mustn't state that STP has "withdrawn recognition" as STP has stated that official proper recognition never constitutionally/ formally occurred in the first place. IJA (talk) 22:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Endorse move to non-recognizers. The most up to date and authoritative sources say that the government of STP does not recognize Kosovo, so we should follow the sources. The situation is similar to Mali (official statement of recognition followed by a statement of non-recognition) so we should treat both equivalently. The historical position should be explained in the relevant cell. TDL (talk) 23:30, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Did my best, feel free to improve it... MissionFix (talk) 02:42, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Nigeria

This seems reasonably reliable and credible: [24]. The Nigerian foreign minister confirms that Nigeria has not recognised Kosovo. I propose we remove it from the recognisers list and reinstate the Nigeria text in the non-recognisers section. Anyone disagree? Bazonka (talk) 22:45, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree. The sources for moving them to the non-recognizers are more convincing than those to keep them in the recognizers. TDL (talk) 00:38, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

There is nothing convincing about it. We should ignore it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Science-FictionFan1 (talk • contribs) 08:24, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

"Nothing convincing", in what way? A quote from the Nigerian foreign minister in an apparently reputable source seems fairly convincing to me. Bazonka (talk) 09:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. This is not some third hand rumor, this is direct from the Nigerian foreign minister. --Khajidha (talk) 21:19, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Why Nigeria MFA write in an official communication "the Republic of Kosovo"??? [25] [26] [27] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.60.57 (talk) 10:35, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Huh? They're not. The quotations from the MFA just refer to Kosovo; it's the journalists who've added the "Republic of". The third link doesn't even mention "Reublic". This is an irrelevance. Bazonka (talk) 18:41, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Could someone who knows what they are doing move Nigeria to the non-recognition section? Bazonka and I have both reverted edits that did it in a haphazard manner that left the recognizers table misnumbered. --Khajidha (talk) 13:46, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

It is clear now that Nigeria has indeed not recognised Kosovo yet. IJA (talk) 13:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

True, but removing it from the recognition table should not leave a misnumbered table and a recognitions count that still includes it. That's why Bazonka and I reverted those changes. --Khajidha (talk) 14:37, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I moved it down to the non-recognition section, changing the note on dispute into the main prose and adding the source Bazonka brought in above. Probably worth going over by someone who has been following this situation more than me. CMD (talk) 16:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I am aware of the sourcing issues, but former Deputy PM Behgjet Pacolli is in Abuja and met with the new president of Nigeria, who he said would recognize Kosovo after his government is in place [28]. - ILBobby (talk) 20:18, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Antigua and Barbuda

Antigua and Barbuda just recognised, so far Kosovo MFA announced in a tweet, replace is needed when media writes about it. Digitalpaper (talk) 08:52, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

• http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=2,4,2633#.VVyim7ntmkp MOFA of Kosovo write--Murza-Zade (talk) 16:06, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Anyone seen any reliable source or facsimile of the note verbale that A&B did really recognize Kosovo? This only source is a Facebook announcement of Hashim Thaci followed by a short article about the arrival of the note, but the note itself is to be seen nowhere.

The fact that only Thaci's words support this "event" is a little dubious. According to Thaci, even Cook Islands recognized Kosovo, without knowing that they have no foreign policy so don't care to recognize or not recognize anyone. Well, he can't tell the difference between a sovereign country and a protectorate.Mondiad (talk) 23:53, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Huh? The Cook Islands has a Ministry of Foreign Affairs which put out a newsletter in which they announced their "mutual respect for sovereignty" with Kosovo. That's hardly "no foreign policy" or "don't care to recognize". TDL (talk) 00:59, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Puerto Rico has a State Department as well, doesn't mean that Puerto Rico can or cannot recognize Kosovo. I wouldn't be surprised to hear one day Thaci claiming "Puerto Rico" recognized Kosovo" or "Greenland recognized Kosovo".

And most important, A&B official site mentions 2012 meetings with Kosovo FM, but nothing on recognition, not a single word. Any international newspaper, any local news agenecy? Or just Thaci's Facebook account? Mondiad (talk) 23:56, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

The difference is, Puerto Rico is a dependent territory, whereas the Cook Islands are in legal free association with New Zealand. The Cook Islands waive their right to a UN seat and other trappings of sovereignty by agreement with New Zealand, which they can legally abrogate, whereas United States law can unilaterally alter any part of the status of Puerto Rican home rule and Puerto Rico could not become sovereign without a change in US law. Plus, here's a local news source reporting on the ceremony.[29] Astrofreak92 (talk) 02:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

The point of the MFA link was certainly not to suggest that the Cook Islands engages in foreign diplomatic relations simply because it had a MFA. It was to falsify the claim that the Cook Islands had "no foreign policy", by showing that it had an entire Ministry devoted to the subject. I furthermore provided a link which showed that the Cook Islands engages in foreign diplomatic relations and had formally recognized Kosovo, contrary to the claim that it "don't care to recognize". Now you seem to have changed your argument to it "cannot recognize Kosovo". However, the Cooks Islands has full authority for it's own foreign relations. Numerous other states have recognized the Cook Islands (ie [30], [31]) and established diplomatic relations with it (ie [32]). Conversely, no states have ever recognized or established diplomatic relations with Greenland or Puerto Rico. Their legal statuses are entirely different. Trying to draw comparisons between these two cases is a false analogy.

Thaci did not "claim" Cook Islands had recognized them. It was the "Cook Islands" claiming that the Cook Islands had recognizes Kosovo. This is all very well sourced.

And yes, the A&B announcement wasn't "just Thaci's Facebook account". If you read this article you will see a link to a press release announcing it from the MFA: [33]. A quick Google search reveals a number of media outlets which picked up the story (ie [34]). TDL (talk) 22:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on International recognition of Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090614040328/http://www.mmrree.gov.ec:80/mre/documentos/novedades/informes/ano2008/agosto/londres.htm to http://www.mmrree.gov.ec/mre/documentos/novedades/informes/ano2008/agosto/londres.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081203093410/http://noticias.terra.com/articulo/html/act1142155.htm to http://noticias.terra.com/articulo/html/act1142155.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141006120850/http://www.kktcb.eu/index.php?tpl=show_news&id=236 to http://www.kktcb.eu/index.php?tpl=show_news&id=236

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

UNESCO

UNESCO Board Agrees Kosovo Membership Vote B92

voted in favor Afghanistan, Albania, Austria, Belize, Britain, Gabon, Gambia, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Italy, Kuwait, Macedonia, Germany, Pakistan, St. Kitts and Nevis, the United States, Thailand, Togo, the United Arab Emirates, France, Holland, Montenegro, the Czech Republic, Chad, and Sweden.

Against were Argentina, Angola, Brazil, Ecuador, Ethiopia, India, Cuba, China, Morocco, Mexico, Namibia, Nigeria, Russia, and Spain.

Those who abstained included Algeria, Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Mauritius, Malawi, Mozambique, Mali, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Trinidad and Tobago, and Uganda.

Representatives of Tunis, Turkmenistan, and Ukraine were not in the room during the voting.

South Sudan is the only country which does not recognize Kosovo, but sponsored its membership in UNESCO.UNESCO — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.73.129.99 (talk) 23:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Official UNESCO Votes Regarding the Admission of Kosovo (2015)
#	IN FAVOR	AGAINST	ABSTAIN	ABSENT	SUSPENDED
Votes	92	50	29	15	9
Valid	64.79%	35.21%
Total	47.18%	25.64%	14.87%	7.69%	4.62%
1	Afghanistan	Angola	Algeria	Azerbaijan	Antigua & Barbuda
2	Albania	Argentina	Bangladesh	Cape Verde	Comoros
3	Andorra	Armenia	Barbados	Cambodia	Dominica
4	Australia	Belarus	Bhutan	Marshall Islands	Israel
5	Austria	Bolivia	Bosnia	Iran	Kiribati
6	Bahamas	Botswana	Burundi	Iraq	Micronesia
7	Bahrain	Brazil	Cameroon	Madagascar	Niue
8	Belgium	Chile	Colombia	Maldives	Sao Tome
9	Belize	Congo	Egypt	Mauritania	United States
10	Benin	Cuba	Greece	Mongolia
11	Brunei	Cyprus	Guinea-Bissau	Uzbekistan
12	Bulgaria	Dem Rep Congo	Jamaica	Swaziland
13	Burkina Faso	Ecuador	Japan	Tajikistan
14	Canada	Equatorial Guinea	Kenya	Turkmenistan
15	Chad	Eritrea	Mali	Ukraine
16	China	Ethiopia	Nepal
17	Cook Islands	Georgia	Nigeria
18	Costa Rica	Guatemala	Peru
19	Croatia	India	Poland
20	Czech Rep	Indonesia	Central African Rep
21	Denmark	Kazakhstan	South Korea
22	Djibouti	Kyrgyzstan	Romania
23	Dominican Rep	Laos	Saint Vincent
24	El Salvador	Lebanon	Seychelles
25	Estonia	Morocco	Singapore
26	Fiji	Mauritius	Trinidad & Tabago
27	Finland	Mexico	Tunisia
28	France	Moldova	Viet Nam
29	Gabon	Mozambique	Zambia
30	Gambia	Myanmar
31	Germany	Namibia
32	Ghana	Nicaragua
33	Grenada	North Korea
34	Guinea	Palestine
35	Guyana	Paraguay
36	Haiti	Philippines
37	Honduras	Russia
38	Hungary	Saudi Arabia
39	Iceland	Serbia
40	Ireland	Slovakia
41	Italy	South Africa
42	Ivory Coast	South Sudan
43	Jordan	Spain
44	Kuwait	Sri Lanka
45	Latvia	Suriname
46	Lesotho	Syria
47	Liberia	Uganda
48	Libya	Uruguay
49	Lithuania	Venezuela
50	Luxembourg	Zimbabwe
51	Macedonia
52	Malawi
53	Malaysia
54	Malta
55	Monaco
56	Montenegro
57	Nauru
58	Netherlands
59	New Zealand
60	Niger
61	Norway
62	Oman
63	Pakistan
64	Palau
65	Panama
66	Papua New Guinea
67	Portugal
68	Qatar
69	Rwanda
70	Saint Kitts & Nevis
71	Samoa
72	San Marino
73	Saint Lucia
74	Senegal
75	Sierra Leone
76	Slovenia
77	Solomon Islands
78	Somalia
79	Sudan
80	Sweden
81	Switzerland
82	Tanzania
83	Thailand
84	Timor Leste
85	Togo
86	Tonga
87	Turkey
88	Tuvalu
89	UA Emirates
90	United Kingdom
91	Vanuatu
92	Yemen

WikiSkylight (talk) 15:31, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 10 external links on International recognition of Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150425231648/http://www.km.gov.al/?fq=brenda&m=news&lid=7323&gj=gj2 to http://www.km.gov.al/?fq=brenda&m=news&lid=7323&gj=gj2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120217183113/http://www.haaba.com/news/2008/02/19/7-93587/senegal-recognises-kosovos-independence-ministry to http://www.haaba.com/news/2008/02/19/7-93587/senegal-recognises-kosovos-independence-ministry
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090917092630/http://www.kln.gov.my:80/?m_id=26&vid=797 to http://www.kln.gov.my/?m_id=26&vid=797
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130926181330/http://www.presidencia.gob.pa/noticia.php?cod=10471 to http://www.presidencia.gob.pa/noticia.php?cod=10471
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081016140302/http://www.mofa.gov.bd:80/Adviser%20press%20release.htm to http://www.mofa.gov.bd/Adviser%20press%20release.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141217132156/http://www.kosovotimes.net/flash-news/314-kosovos-foreign-minister-engaged-in-tough-lobbying-campaign.html to http://www.kosovotimes.net/flash-news/314-kosovos-foreign-minister-engaged-in-tough-lobbying-campaign.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110928154814/http://www.mre.gov.py/dependencias/prensa/Comunicados/listado.asp?codigo=143 to http://www.mre.gov.py/dependencias/prensa/Comunicados/listado.asp?codigo=143
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150506025147/http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/general/2010/04/02/pilot-mission-promote-kosovo to http://guardian.co.tt/news/general/2010/04/02/pilot-mission-promote-kosovo
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110928200637/http://www.csees.net/?page=news&news_id=70902&country_id=6 to http://www.csees.net/?page=news&news_id=70902&country_id=6
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100717102333/http://www.apsnypress.info:80/archiv.htm to http://www.apsnypress.info/archiv.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:45, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on International recognition of Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141217164449/http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/country-files_156/kosovo_6154/index.html to http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/country-files_156/kosovo_6154/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20151015212559/http://www.mzv.cz/wwwo/mzv/default.asp?id=58430&ido=6569&idj=2&amb=1 to http://www.mzv.cz/wwwo/mzv/default.asp?id=58430&ido=6569&idj=2&amb=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090326061230/http://www.elmoudjahid.com:80/accueil/cooperation/29583.html to http://www.elmoudjahid.com/accueil/cooperation/29583.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081109035814/http://www.armenialiberty.org:80/armeniareport/report/en/2008/09/E5FDD453-D06C-4C03-B625-2C741767F725.ASP to http://www.armenialiberty.org/armeniareport/report/en/2008/09/E5FDD453-D06C-4C03-B625-2C741767F725.ASP
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090220234608/http://www.iht.com:80/articles/ap/2008/02/21/america/LA-GEN-Venezuela-Kosovo.php to http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/21/america/LA-GEN-Venezuela-Kosovo.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131103223544/http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1,13,63281 to http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1,13,63281
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150403094412/http://www.alalam.ir/english/en-NewsPage.asp?newsid=041030120080314111725 to http://www.alalam.ir/english/en-NewsPage.asp?newsid=041030120080314111725
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080705045426/http://www.tiraspoltimes.com/news/pmr_foreign_ministry_kosovo_sets_new_model_for_conflict_solving.html to http://www.tiraspoltimes.com/news/pmr_foreign_ministry_kosovo_sets_new_model_for_conflict_solving.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110611071737/http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200906291301dowjonesdjonline000485&title=kosovo-joins-imfworld-bank to http://nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200906291301dowjonesdjonline000485&title=kosovo-joins-imfworld-bank

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:52, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on International recognition of Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100708082703/http://glassrbije.org:80/E/index.php?option=com_content to http://glassrbije.org/E/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8033&Itemid=26
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110720071135/http://law.by/work/EnglPortal.nsf/0/7B9B31D05C83F472C22573FD005407DF to http://law.by/work/EnglPortal.nsf/0/7B9B31D05C83F472C22573FD005407DF
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080308015840/http://english.aljazeera.net:80/NR/exeres/9E33FC42-C69C-46A0-BA23-5E36BCA1109D.htm to http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9E33FC42-C69C-46A0-BA23-5E36BCA1109D.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100708082703/http://glassrbije.org:80/E/index.php?option=com_content to http://glassrbije.org/E/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7578&Itemid=2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080315163952/http://mnweekly.ru:80/world/20080313/55316656.html to http://mnweekly.ru/world/20080313/55316656.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100708082703/http://glassrbije.org:80/E/index.php?option=com_content to http://glassrbije.org/E/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9164&Itemid=26
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120908172945/http://www.gazetaexpress.com:80/?cid=1,13,90988 to http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1,13,90988
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080501032646/http://www.ultimasnoticias.com.uy:80/hemeroteca/190208/portada/general.html to http://www.ultimasnoticias.com.uy/hemeroteca/190208/portada/general.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090607074518/http://www.kosovotimes.net:80/flash-news/410-kosovo-to-apply-for-council-of-europe-membership.html to http://www.kosovotimes.net/flash-news/410-kosovo-to-apply-for-council-of-europe-membership.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:33, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 11 external links on International recognition of Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120119044735/http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1,13,38702 to http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1,13,38702#3
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110720135411/http://www.trabajadores.cu/reflexiones-de-fidel-castro/ingles/i-hope-i-never-have-reason-to-be-ashamed/ to http://www.trabajadores.cu/reflexiones-de-fidel-castro/ingles/i-hope-i-never-have-reason-to-be-ashamed/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110711002636/http://www.finchannel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9895&Itemid=55 to http://www.finchannel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9895&Itemid=55
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111120142634/http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/18/europe/EU-GEN-Moldova-Kosovo.php to http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/18/europe/EU-GEN-Moldova-Kosovo.php
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120226144025/http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=149141 to http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=149141
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131104030008/http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/19/asia/AS-GEN-Asia-Kosovo.php to http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/19/asia/AS-GEN-Asia-Kosovo.php
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110605040349/http://www.nineoclock.ro/index.php?page=detalii&categorie=worldnews&id=20090208-20466 to http://www.nineoclock.ro/index.php?page=detalii&categorie=worldnews&id=20090208-20466
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110727171541/http://gadebate.un.org/View/SpeechView/tabid/85/smid/411/ArticleID/150/reftab/227/t/Romania/Default.aspx to http://gadebate.un.org/View/SpeechView/tabid/85/smid/411/ArticleID/150/reftab/227/t/Romania/Default.aspx
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120427042207/http://www.daily-mail.co.zm/media/news/viewnews.cgi?category=8&id=1298846602 to http://www.daily-mail.co.zm/media/news/viewnews.cgi?category=8&id=1298846602
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130404135637/http://www.karabakh-open.com/src/index.php?lang=en&id=3&nid=8261 to http://www.karabakh-open.com/src/index.php?lang=en&id=3&nid=8261
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110605223032/http://www.oic-oci.org/topic_detail.asp?t_id=840&x_key= to http://www.oic-oci.org/topic_detail.asp?t_id=840&x_key=

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:51, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:International recognition of Kosovo/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peter SamFan (talk · contribs) 13:54, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

I will review this GAN. This may take several days. Peter Sam Fan 13:54, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Lead

At the end of the second sentence in the lead, why is international recognition of Kosovo in boldface? Also, instead of world community, which seems confusing to me, why not just put the world instead. Peter Sam Fan 13:58, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

"International recognition of Kosovo" is bold because it is the name of the article, although it does appear later than recommended by WP:BOLDTITLE. Bazonka (talk) 20:29, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

I've reworded the lead to bring the bold title nearer to the start, and I've removed the phrase "world community". Bazonka (talk) 20:57, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Main Body

We should remove the section called "Serbia's Reaction" as it give undue weight (is "weight" the right word for me to use?) and then merge it into the "s" section in the middle. Peter Sam Fan 18:43, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. Serbia differs significantly from the other countries because it and many other countries see Kosovo as being a part of Serbia. Serbia's position is way more important than that of the others. If Serbia changed its stance (unlikely but theoretically possible), the others would most likely follow. So of course its position is given more weight in the article than that of other nations, but this does not mean that it is WP:UNDUE — it's because its position has more weight. Bazonka (talk) 20:48, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

The rest of the article looks good. I have put the GAN on hold for seven days. Peter Sam Fan 18:52, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

@Bazonka: Time for my bedtime. I'll finish the review on Friday afternoon or so. Peter Sam Fan 00:26, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

@Bazonka: In the sentence "Zahid Oruj, member of the parliamentary committee on defence and security, explained it by saying "Owing to the change of situation in Kosovo, the Azeri peacekeeping battalion performing its mission within the Turkish contingent will be withdrawn", I would put "a member" instead of just "member." That does not seem like good English to me.

Changed. Bazonka (talk) 16:25, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

@Bazonka: Sorry for taking so long. I've fixed the dashes using a script, and it seems like the rest of the article is good-article-worthy. I would copyedit it, and check for dead links before adding it to WP:GA. Peter Sam Fan 18:29, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Classification

Peter SamFan, Bazonka, it seemed to me that this nomination had stalled, so I took a look at it to see what the issues might be in the hopes of getting it moving again. When I looked at the article, however, it seemed to me to be more of a list than a regular article—the vast bulk of it certainly is lists in table form—and if so, it shouldn't be judged here at GAN. Instead, if it were nominated for anything, it should try for a Featured List (WP:FLC).

I wasn't sure, though, so I consulted one of the people who run the FLC process, Chris Woodrich, on his talk page. His opinion is that it sort of resembles Description of the Western Isles of Scotland in terms of article construction, which is a Featured List.

Part of the Good Article criteria is that stand-alone lists are not eligible to be Good Articles, and I think this probably falls under that criterion. As such, the nomination (originally made by Iheartthestrals) would not qualify and the review should end. You may want to consider nominated it at FLC, but before you do, I suggest you read his suggestions on his talk page at the link above and make sure they are addressed before nominating there.

I'm sorry this wasn't better news, but I think it's good we caught this now rather than later. Peter SamFan, you'll want to close this review (unfortunately, the only option at this point is to do so using the FailedGA template on the article talk page); Bazonka, if you'd like to pursue an FLC, you'll definitely want to make the improvements suggested by Chris. Iheartthestrals, since you did not participate in this nomination, you should not pursue an FLC unless you plan to both respond to requests made as part of the review and to consult with the editors on the article talk page to get their concurrence before starting an FLC. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:39, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset and Bazonka: That's okay. Peter Sam Fan 12:29, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Oman

Oman's status is disputed. Here is the timeline:

• 4 February 2011: MFA announces recognition. The note text was: "In acknowledging the decision of the International Court of Justice on the independence of Kosovo, the Government of the Sultanate of Oman will welcome Kosovo’s membership to the United Nations, as well as to other international and regional organizations it wishes to join".
• 7 September 2011: Deputy FM Petrit Selimi tweets that "Oman had never recognized as Vlora clarified in a statement in Feb." See also: [35] and this: "Pristina later accepted that it had misread this recognition, when it had in fact been a more general statement of future support"
• 20 September 2011: MFA announces that "soon diplomatic relations will be established between the two states".
• 20 February 2012: Rexhep Boja, the charge d'affaires of the Kosovo Embassy in Saudi Arabia is reported to have said that Oman had not yet recognized Kosovo.

This is all summarized in Ker-Lindsay's book here.

ILBobby is removing a note mentioning this, on the grounds that "There is no dispute that Oman and Kosovo have established diplomatic relations." However, the only evidence presented to support this claim is the February 2011 PR, which the MFA itself has already acknowledge was in error. The September 2011 note only speaks of plans for future diplomatic relations. So, is there any evidence that diplomatic relations were ever actually established? If so, then great lets add that and remove the ambiguity. If not, given that a neutral, independent WP:reliable source mentions that there is some lack of clarity about this, I believe we should also include a mention. Note that I'm not proposing that it be moved to the non-recognizers, just that we acknowledge that there is some uncertainty in wp:secondary sources such as the Ker-Lindsay book. The MFA PR is obviously a partisan WP:primary sources, so we need to be careful in overlying on it. TDL (talk) 03:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

I remember you being here before and you consistently caused disturbances with undiscussed, unilateral, partisan edits such as this. You've apparently decided to bring this up because after careful googling for "Kosovo Oman" you got a hit in a book written 4 years ago. This page is about recognition - the foreign relations page is about diplomatic relations. Your third link from 20 September 2011 explicitly states, "recognition is reconfirmed." Since this page is about recognition, there is no dispute. - ILBobby (talk) 03:59, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry? My "undiscussed, unilateral, partisan edits"? Care to point to a few? You mean like here? Or here? Or here? Rather than making unfounded and illinformed WP:personal attacks, please address the substance of the argument. If you are too emotionally invested in this subject to discuss it without attacking those who disagree with you then I suggest editing other subjects.

Yes diplomatic relations and recognition are different. But it was you who connected the two with this argument: "There is no dispute that Oman and Kosovo have established diplomatic relations. One does not establish formal government-to-government relations with countries you do not recognize. Find more evidence." The entire premise of your argument was that they had recognized by virtue of their diplomatic relations. However, as I demonstrated above that point is clearly refuted by the sources. If you wish to move the goalposts and change your argument then fine, but that was why this argument was presented above.

Now then, did you make it to bullet point four in the list above where a Kosovar diplomat said that Oman hadn't recognized in February 2012 (which postdates the September 2011 source you are now citing)? Hence the dispute. TDL (talk) 04:30, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Updating?

This article has not updated for more than a year the number of states that recognize Kosovo. Is anybody in charge of it? Whoever was in charge up to 23rd june 2015 is still in charge? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.164.95.79 (talk) 08:53, 24 June 2016 (UTC) Is anybody in charge? Why is it not updated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.164.95.79 (talk) 10:59, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a collaboration. Nobody is "in charge". And the reason that no more recognisers have been added to the list is because there aren't any new ones. However, if you know differently, then feel free to make an update yourself. Bazonka (talk) 17:13, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

If there are no more recognitions it should read "as of july 2016" instead of june 2015, because it looks like that it has been abandoned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.164.95.79 (talk) 12:31, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on International recognition of Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5rRB9e3bz?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.icj-cij.org%2Fdocket%2Ffiles%2F141%2F15987.pdf to http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/15987.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141031170056/http://uk.reuters.com/article/2008/02/18/uk-kosovo-serbia-britain-idUKL1824693920080218 to http://uk.reuters.com/article/2008/02/18/uk-kosovo-serbia-britain-idUKL1824693920080218
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604164525/http://www.vm.ee/en/node/682 to http://www.vm.ee/en/node/682
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080305011519/http://foreignaffairs.gov.ie:80/home/index.aspx?id=42938 to http://foreignaffairs.gov.ie/home/index.aspx?id=42938
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081017065840/http://www.wam.org.ae:80/servlet/Satellite?c=WamLocEnews&cid=1223546208865&p=1135099400124&pagename=WAM/WamLocEnews/W-T-LEN-FullNews to http://www.wam.org.ae/servlet/Satellite?c=WamLocEnews&cid=1223546208865&p=1135099400124&pagename=WAM%2FWamLocEnews%2FW-T-LEN-FullNews
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111207002940/http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=136077&bolum=102 to http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=136077&bolum=102
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pewinternet.org/images/header-sidebar-SEARCH.gif
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110916154608/http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1203343699593&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1203343699593&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geeky.net/geeky.css
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110609180815/http://www.euractiv.com/en/enlargement/serbia-russia-fury-kosovo-independence-draws-near/article-170333 to http://www.euractiv.com/en/enlargement/serbia-russia-fury-kosovo-independence-draws-near/article-170333
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111207002940/http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=136077&bolum=102 to http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=136077&bolum=102

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Bangladesh recognition (need to update Map)

According to Dhaka Tribune, Bangladesh has recognized Kosovo. See here for more http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/foreign-affairs/2017/02/27/bangladesh-officially-recognises-kosovo-independent-state/ --alchaemia (talk) 10:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

UPDATE The page has been updated to reflect this change, with the acceptation of the world map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.105.136 (talk) 12:38, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

North Korea missing

Where is North Korea, because the country has no report to recognize Kosovo.2602:30A:C0FF:A6E0:2D20:7EA3:6573:A73F (talk) 02:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

When there is nothing to report, there is no information to include in the article. We don't include every country in the world for the sake of it, we only include countries which have notable information re the article subject which is of use to our readers. IJA (talk) 11:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

There are only two UN Member States who are not listed on the page (North Korea and Congo-Brazzaville), so even if the countries have no explicit policy, their absence looks like an omission rather than a conscious decision. As it happens, both countries have taken a position against Kosovo independence, which has been expressed through voting patterns, including their 2015 vote against Kosovar membership in UNESCO. I would be happy to add a sourced entry that these two countries have not made statements on the Kosovo issue but have voted against Kosovo's membership in international organizations. Adtran (talk) 12:38, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Graph of recognisers / non-recognisers

Do we really need the graph at the start of the Background section. I think it's intrusive and doesn't add much of value. What do others think? Bazonka (talk) 22:50, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Very much out of place at best. Maybe move it to a more relevant location, but I would not oppose outright removal.--Khajidha (talk) 16:55, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

I think it is very useful and provides a lot of value. It puts the recognition of Kosovo in the right perspective, in terms of the trend of the number of recognitions, compared to the non-recognizing countries. Otherwise a reader of the first paragraphs might not understand that Kosovo's independence is a progressively increasing global reality, year by year. 2A02:8108:91C0:97F0:CDAC:FDB6:B28B:C7F0 (talk) 12:32, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

If we were to switch the placement of the map with the graph, I believe the reader would have access to information they seek more readily (especially if the reader is determining recognition by a specific country). The graph, which shows recognition of UN member states, is a natural lead-in to the list of UN member states and the dates of their respective recognitions. Andrew1444 (talk) 16:34, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

I've modified the graph to make it more compact, moved it down, and allowed text to float around it. I think it's much less intrusive now. TDL (talk) 17:24, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Much better. I also like the line graph better than the bar graph as it more clearly displays trend. Andrew1444 (talk) 17:49, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

What sense does it make to substitute a much detailed chart (month to month) by a much more simplified one (year to year)?? (and the simplified one is bigger than the detailed one!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salvadorcases (talk • contribs) 10:00, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Not sure what chart you are talking about. We are talking about this one, which is also by year. The one before that (here) was also by year. TDL (talk) 13:03, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

About the graph that detailed month by month the number of UN members that recognized Kosovo over time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salvadorcases (talk • contribs)

Where do you see the monthly graph? TDL (talk) 01:09, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Nowhere: it was substituted by a graph that instead of being detailed month by month is 12 times less detailed. What sense does this substitution make, I wonder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salvadorcases (talk • contribs) 12:49, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

OK I see what you are talking about now. You are referring to 3 substitutions ago. The last substitution replaced this one, which is also by year. The one before that here was also by year. Before that was your image here. While that image might be "12 times more detailed" it is also quite poorly made and hard to edit. And it's not really clear to me what use that extra detail is. We could also have a figure by the day which would be 365*12=4380 times more detailed! Not sure that it would really help anyone understand the subject. TDL (talk) 13:38, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

OK, so the current graph is better. Nothing to say then, it all makes perfect sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salvadorcases (talk • contribs) 23:41, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

The legend could be a bit more informative, e.g. What do "Recognizers" refer to, "Recognizing UN countries" or "Recognizing countries", or "Recognizing states". The graph also has a misunderstanding in terms of international relations, because if a country has not yet issued an official recognition, does not mean it does not recognize Kosovo. As the wiki page on Diplomatic Recognition states "Diplomatic recognition must be distinguished from formal recognition of states or their governments.[1] The fact that states do not maintain bilateral diplomatic relations does not mean that they do not recognize or treat one another as states. A state is not required to accord formal bilateral recognition to any other state, and some have a general policy of not doing so, considering that a vote for its membership of an international organisation restricted to states, such as the United Nations, is proof of recognition.". As specified, lack of official recognition is not the same as non-recognition, since such an act is not mandatory in international relations. As the description on Diplomatic Recognition further emphasizes "Recognition can be implied by other acts, like the visit of the head of state, or the signing of a bilateral treaty. If implicit recognition is possible, a state may feel the need to explicitly proclaim that its acts do not constitute diplomatic recognition, like when the United States commenced its dialogue with the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1988." Several countries (not all obviously) who have not officially recognized Kosovo, recognize it implicitly through such acts, e.g. Rwanda voted in favor of Kosovo's admission to Unesco despite not yet recognizing it officially. Therefore "Non-recognizers" is an imprecise term, I suggest the terms "Officially recognizing states" vs "Other states" to be more informative. Otherwise, it would be more precise to change the article title to "Official International Recognition of Kosovo", to position "Non-recognizers" within the officialism of the recognition act. But I doubt that would complicate the discourse and likely confuse a reader. 147.172.153.35 (talk) 11:59, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. I've changed it to "States formally recognising" and "Other states". TDL (talk) 13:03, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on International recognition of Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=2%2C33
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080402053007/http://www.governo.it/Governo/ConsiglioMinistri/dettaglio.asp?d=38401 to http://www.governo.it/Governo/ConsiglioMinistri/dettaglio.asp?d=38401
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080226145534/http://www.gouvernement.lu/salle_presse/actualite/2008/02-fevrier/20-asselborn-kosovo/index.html to http://www.gouvernement.lu/salle_presse/actualite/2008/02-fevrier/20-asselborn-kosovo/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080305191825/http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/10358/a/99714 to http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/10358/a/99714
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080323041624/http://www.mfa.gov.hu/kum/en/bal/actualities/spokesman_statements/Kosovo_recognition_080319.htm to http://www.mfa.gov.hu/kum/en/bal/actualities/spokesman_statements/Kosovo_recognition_080319.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722222923/http://www.foreign.gov.mv/v3/?p=news&view=sep&nid=3042 to http://www.foreign.gov.mv/v3/?p=news&view=sep&nid=3042
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080915040702/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=29&nav_id=48079 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=29&nav_id=48079
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090730035944/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=07&dd=29&nav_id=60797 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=07&dd=29&nav_id=60797
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120209052053/http://en.apa.az/news.php?id=50855 to http://en.apa.az/news.php?id=50855
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.trabajadores.cu/reflexiones-de-fidel-castro/ingles/i-hope-i-never-have-reason-to-be-ashamed/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1%2C13%2C63281
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1203343699593&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1%2C13%2C38702
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141217133258/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=09&dd=15&nav_id=61781 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=09&dd=15&nav_id=61781
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1%2C13%2C90988
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090709060309/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=07&dd=07&nav_id=60326 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=07&dd=07&nav_id=60326
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090908035928/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=07&dd=08&nav_id=60354 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=07&dd=08&nav_id=60354
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110605223032/http://www.oic-oci.org/topic_detail.asp?t_id=840&x_key= to http://www.oic-oci.org/topic_detail.asp?t_id=840&x_key=

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:50, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 84 external links on International recognition of Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924092418/http://www.rree.go.cr/file.php?id_file=310 to http://www.rree.go.cr/file.php?id_file=310
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141217162049/http://www.aps.sn/articles.php?id_article=40531 to http://www.aps.sn/articles.php?id_article=40531
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081204105043/http://www.mfa.gov.tr/statement-of-h_e_-mr_-ali-babacan_-minister-of-foreign-affairs-of-the-republic--of-turkey_-regarding-the-recognition-of-kosovo.en.mfa to http://www.mfa.gov.tr/statement-of-h_e_-mr_-ali-babacan_-minister-of-foreign-affairs-of-the-republic--of-turkey_-regarding-the-recognition-of-kosovo.en.mfa
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111019052233/http://www.bundesregierung.de/nn_6516/Content/EN/Archiv16/Artikel/2008/02/2008-02-20-deutschland-erkennt-kosovo-an__en.html to http://www.bundesregierung.de/nn_6516/Content/EN/Archiv16/Artikel/2008/02/2008-02-20-deutschland-erkennt-kosovo-an__en.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719132945/http://www.ambbeirut.um.dk/en/menu/aboutus/news/denmarkrecognizeskosovoasanindependentstate.htm to http://www.ambbeirut.um.dk/en/menu/aboutus/news/denmarkrecognizeskosovoasanindependentstate.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080226065905/http://www.rree.gob.pe/portal/boletinInf.nsf/mrealdia/C9B70437F80DBAF7052573F700710D15?OpenDocument to http://www.rree.gob.pe/portal/boletinInf.nsf/mrealdia/C9B70437F80DBAF7052573F700710D15?OpenDocument
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.premier.gov.pl/en/press_centre/news/government_has_recognised_the_%2C2220/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080324111856/http://www.vlada.hr/en/naslovnica/novosti_i_najave/2008/ozujak/hrvatska_priznala_kosovo to http://www.vlada.hr/en/naslovnica/novosti_i_najave/2008/ozujak/hrvatska_priznala_kosovo
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080403062343/http://www.llv.li/amtsstellen/llv-pia-pressemitteilungen/pressemitteilungen-alt.htm?pmid=108807&lpid=3789&imainpos=15844 to http://www.llv.li/amtsstellen/llv-pia-pressemitteilungen/pressemitteilungen-alt.htm?pmid=108807&lpid=3789&imainpos=15844
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.mofat.go.kr/webmodule/htsboard/template/read/engboardread.jsp?typeID=12&boardid=302&seqno=306110&c=TITLE&t=&pagenum=1&tableName=TYPE_ENGLISH&pc=undefined&dc=&wc=&lu=&vu=&iu=&du=
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131022131450/http://newkosovareport.com/20080417889/Politics/breaking-news-republic-of-the-marshall-islands-has-recognized-kosovo.html to http://www.newkosovareport.com/20080417889/Politics/breaking-news-republic-of-the-marshall-islands-has-recognized-kosovo.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080428231354/http://www.newkosovareport.com/20080424902/Politics/Burkina-Faso-recognizes-Kosovo.html to http://www.newkosovareport.com/20080424902/Politics/Burkina-Faso-recognizes-Kosovo.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714172733/http://www.newkosovareport.com/20080530967/Politics/liberia-recognizes-kosovo.html to http://www.newkosovareport.com/20080530967/Politics/liberia-recognizes-kosovo.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111017142205/http://www.newkosovareport.com/200809151219/Politics/samoa-recognizes-independent-kosovo.html to http://www.newkosovareport.com/200809151219/Politics/samoa-recognizes-independent-kosovo.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081015121606/http://www.mia.com.mk/default.aspx?vId=57722300&lId=2 to http://www.mia.com.mk/default.aspx?vId=57722300&lId=2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130313164623/http://www.akr-ks.eu/news/image/62/kiribati.jpg to http://www.akr-ks.eu/news/image/62/kiribati.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104003420/http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/25.06.2011_nota_verbale_Republika_e_Afrikes_Qendrore.jpg to http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/25.06.2011_nota_verbale_Republika_e_Afrikes_Qendrore.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104002730/http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/16.08.2011_nota_verbale_Guina_Conakry.jpg to http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/16.08.2011_nota_verbale_Guina_Conakry.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104002954/http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/16.08.2011_nota_verbale_Nigeri.jpg to http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/16.08.2011_nota_verbale_Nigeri.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104002650/http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/09.09.2011_nota_verbale_Gaboni.jpg to http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/09.09.2011_nota_verbale_Gaboni.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104002523/http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/20.09.2011_nota_verbale_Bregu_i_Fildishte_.jpg to http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/20.09.2011_nota_verbale_Bregu_i_Fildishte_.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130521125944/http://www.kosovatimes.net/repository/images/nota_verbale.jpg to http://www.kosovatimes.net/repository/images/nota_verbale.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130223082422/http://www.postcourier.com.pg/20121003/news12.htm to http://www.postcourier.com.pg/20121003/news12.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016111908/http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/docs/SKMBT_C22012102816470.pdf to http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/docs/SKMBT_C22012102816470.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130102231400/http://www.mofa.gov.pk/mfa/pages/article.aspx?id=1429&type=1 to http://www.mofa.gov.pk/mfa/pages/article.aspx?id=1429&type=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131213170600/http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/q71/s720x720/1016336_374748159293609_1053382903_n.jpg to http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/q71/s720x720/1016336_374748159293609_1053382903_n.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130630231622/http://www.mfa.gov.eg/Arabic/Ministry/News/Pages/NewsDetails.aspx?Source=1d5b0202-c337-4794-ab10-342893d069e1&newsID=17393f2d-a0db-471c-bd41-1c1d169b79c2 to http://www.mfa.gov.eg/Arabic/Ministry/News/Pages/NewsDetails.aspx?Source=1d5b0202-c337-4794-ab10-342893d069e1&newsID=17393f2d-a0db-471c-bd41-1c1d169b79c2
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://koha.net/?id=27&l=58028
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607170014/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=05&dd=17&nav_id=59212 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=05&dd=17&nav_id=59212
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091203173957/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=12&dd=02&nav_id=63443 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=12&dd=02&nav_id=63443
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717100920/http://www.tribune242.com/news/05012010_nkn-kosovo_news_pg3 to http://www.tribune242.com/news/05012010_nkn-kosovo_news_pg3
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111002143043/http://news.belta.by/en/news/politics/?id=201573 to http://news.belta.by/en/news/politics/?id=201573
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080228000944/http://www.sovrep.gov.by/index.php/.1.3763...0.0.0.html to http://www.sovrep.gov.by/index.php/.1.3763...0.0.0.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130628191515/http://english.blic.rs/News/5557/Kabila-I-shall-not-recognize-Kosovo-as-long-as-I-live- to http://english.blic.rs/News/5557/Kabila-I-shall-not-recognize-Kosovo-as-long-as-I-live-
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104200936/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=04&dd=06&nav_id=73654 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=04&dd=06&nav_id=73654
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607034349/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=03&dd=26&nav_id=48811 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=03&dd=26&nav_id=48811
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090227064959/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=02&dd=23&nav_id=57371 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=02&dd=23&nav_id=57371
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100126141251/http://www.blic.rs/politika.php?id=97476 to http://www.blic.rs/politika.php?id=97476
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://glassrbije.org/E/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7578&Itemid=2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111124060831/http://www.zeri.info/artikulli/1/1/38812/guineja-ekuatoriale-se-shpejti-formalizon-njohjen-e-kosoves/ to http://www.zeri.info/artikulli/1/1/38812/guineja-ekuatoriale-se-shpejti-formalizon-njohjen-e-kosoves/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080813053323/http://www.geotimes.ge/index.php?m=home&newsid=9375 to http://www.geotimes.ge/index.php?m=home&newsid=9375
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090916070219/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=05&dd=09&nav_id=50095 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=05&dd=09&nav_id=50095
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717011253/http://website.thejc.com/home.aspx?AId=58213&ATypeId=1&search=true2&srchstr=Kosovo&srchtxt=0&srchhead=1&srchauthor=0&srchsandp=0&scsrch=0 to http://website.thejc.com/home.aspx?AId=58213&ATypeId=1&search=true2&srchstr=Kosovo&srchtxt=0&srchhead=1&srchauthor=0&srchsandp=0&scsrch=0
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607163857/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=04&dd=28&nav_id=58800 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=04&dd=28&nav_id=58800
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091103061203/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=10&dd=28&nav_id=62641 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=10&dd=28&nav_id=62641
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110701075824/http://www.albanianeconomy.com/news/2011/06/28/israeli-will-recognize-kosovo-after-spain-and-greece-says-fm/ to http://www.albanianeconomy.com/news/2011/06/28/israeli-will-recognize-kosovo-after-spain-and-greece-says-fm/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720064857/http://www.mfa.kg/mews-of-mfa-kr/poziciya-kirgizskoi-respubliki-po-kosovo_en.html to http://www.mfa.kg/mews-of-mfa-kr/poziciya-kirgizskoi-respubliki-po-kosovo_en.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120223010234/http://www.parlament.al/web/Kosovo_in_Lebanon_s_agenda_13727_2.php to http://www.parlament.al/web/Kosovo_in_Lebanon_s_agenda_13727_2.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120320203515/http://www.zeri.info/artikulli/1/1/31880/pacolli-merr-garanci-per-njohje-nga-guineja/ to http://www.zeri.info/artikulli/1/1/31880/pacolli-merr-garanci-per-njohje-nga-guineja/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/s720x720/2788_10152029879470153_240257694_n.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121102084326/http://essor.ml/actualite/article/reconnaissance-de-la-republique-du to http://www.essor.ml/actualite/article/reconnaissance-de-la-republique-du
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120903023652/http://www.zeri.info/artikulli/1/1/56418/pacolli-ne-afrike-pritet-rikonfirmimi-i-njohjes-nga-mali/ to http://www.zeri.info/artikulli/1/1/56418/pacolli-ne-afrike-pritet-rikonfirmimi-i-njohjes-nga-mali/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120322152354/http://www.akr-ks.eu/articles/203 to http://www.akr-ks.eu/articles/203
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130313163606/http://www.km.gov.al/?fq=brenda&m=news&lid=17148&gj=gj2 to http://www.km.gov.al/?fq=brenda&m=news&lid=17148&gj=gj2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091124051345/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=11&dd=22&nav_id=63210 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=11&dd=22&nav_id=63210
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://bsanna-news.ukrinform.ua/newsitem.php?id=22532&lang=en
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.expressodasilhas.sapo.cv/pt/noticias/go/sao-tome--presidente-da-republica-declara-inexistente-reconhecimento-do-kosovo
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.mea.gov.lk/index.php/media/1141-foreign-ministry-statement-on-the-unilateral-declaration-of-independence-by-kosovo
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090515001738/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=05&dd=13&nav_id=59133 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=05&dd=13&nav_id=59133
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091108231109/http://www.blic.rs/svet.php?id=119458 to http://www.blic.rs/svet.php?id=119458
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130927190736/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=08&dd=14&nav_id=75911 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=08&dd=14&nav_id=75911
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130303045531/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2013&mm=02&dd=28&nav_id=84925 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2013&mm=02&dd=28&nav_id=84925
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130313163458/http://www.km.gov.al/index.php?fq=brenda&m=news&lid=13716&gj=gj2 to http://www.km.gov.al/index.php?fq=brenda&m=news&lid=13716&gj=gj2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006102316/http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/ugandannv.jpg to http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/images/ugandannv.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130313165659/http://www.tanjug.rs/news/33366/jeremic-says-uganda-did-not-recognize-kosovo.htm to http://www.tanjug.rs/news/33366/jeremic-says-uganda-did-not-recognize-kosovo.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101002074254/http://www.emg.rs/en/news/serbia/134019.html to http://www.emg.rs/en/news/serbia/134019.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080226171612/http://mfa.uz/rus/pressa_i_media_servis/200208r_4.mgr to http://mfa.uz/rus/pressa_i_media_servis/200208r_4.mgr
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426075752/http://www.znbc.co.zm/media/news/viewnews.cgi?category=8&id=1204535399 to http://www.znbc.co.zm/media/news/viewnews.cgi?category=8&id=1204535399
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131214163631/http://daily-mail.co.zm/blog/2013/12/08/edgar-lungu-holds-talks-with-kosovo-counterpart/ to http://daily-mail.co.zm/blog/2013/12/08/edgar-lungu-holds-talks-with-kosovo-counterpart/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131213165344/http://www.kosovapress.com/en/politics/zambia-promises-to-recognise-kosovos-independence-7079/ to http://www.kosovapress.com/en/politics/zambia-promises-to-recognise-kosovos-independence-7079/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121126144411/http://www.financialgazette.co.zw/national-report/7771-kosovo-pilot-lands-in-zim.html to http://www.financialgazette.co.zw/national-report/7771-kosovo-pilot-lands-in-zim.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607052553/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=09&dd=05&nav_id=53249 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=09&dd=05&nav_id=53249
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121117064401/http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/10260504-nonaligned-summit-in-belgrade-historic-moment-for-creation-of-independent-palestinian-state to http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/10260504-nonaligned-summit-in-belgrade-historic-moment-for-creation-of-independent-palestinian-state
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121105151932/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=09&dd=06&nav_id=76268 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=09&dd=06&nav_id=76268
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080226124706/http://www.spsrasd.info/en/detail.php?id=839 to http://www.spsrasd.info/en/detail.php?id=839
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120407005117/http://www.idhanka.com/index/2010/11/somaliland-pushes-for-international-recognition/ to http://www.idhanka.com/index/2010/11/somaliland-pushes-for-international-recognition/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607052533/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=09&dd=02&nav_id=53167 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=09&dd=02&nav_id=53167
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103235801/http://www.parlament.al/web/The_Speaker_of_the_Parliament_of_Grenada_a_letter_to_the_Albanian_Speaker_Soon_an_immediate_incre_11010_2.php to http://www.parlament.al/web/The_Speaker_of_the_Parliament_of_Grenada_a_letter_to_the_Albanian_Speaker_Soon_an_immediate_incre_11010_2.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121105134036/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=08&dd=19&nav_id=75991 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=08&dd=19&nav_id=75991
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131106005818/http://www.ebrd.com/pages/news/press/2012/121116a.shtml to http://www.ebrd.com/pages/news/press/2012/121116a.shtml
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.blic.co.rs/news.php?id=2236
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090206192034/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=02&dd=05&nav_id=56938 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=02&dd=05&nav_id=56938
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151123043535/http://www.oic-oci.org/36cfm/w/en/res/36CFM-POL-RES-FINAL.pdf to http://www.oic-oci.org/36cfm/w/en/res/36CFM-POL-RES-FINAL.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904044402/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=05&dd=24&nav_id=59349 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2009&mm=05&dd=24&nav_id=59349
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150225121624/http://www.oic-oci.org/38cfm/en/documents/res/POL-RES-38-CFM-FINAL-2.pdf to http://www.oic-oci.org/38cfm/en/documents/res/POL-RES-38-CFM-FINAL-2.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.oic-oci.org/english/conf/fm/39/POL-RES-39%20-FINAL.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130501121925/http://www.oic-oci.org/external_web/is/12/en/docs/final/is12_fc_en.pdf to http://www.oic-oci.org/external_web/is/12/en/docs/final/is12_fc_en.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104195239/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2012&mm=07&dd=11&nav_id=81211 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2012&mm=07&dd=11&nav_id=81211
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104195232/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/world-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=18&nav_id=47801 to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/world-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=18&nav_id=47801
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721192202/http://www.chechencenter.info/n/events/484-1.html to http://www.chechencenter.info/n/events/484-1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080226061717/http://www.glavred.info/archive/2008/02/22/170150-18.html to http://www.glavred.info/archive/2008/02/22/170150-18.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120318070115/http://www.newkosovareport.com/200905041731/Business-and-Economy/kosovo-becomes-member-of-international-road-transport-union.html to http://www.newkosovareport.com/200905041731/Business-and-Economy/Kosovo-becomes-member-of-International-Road-Transport-Union.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120318070344/http://www.newkosovareport.com/200905291820/Society/republic-of-kosovo-becomes-member-of-iba.html to http://www.newkosovareport.com/200905291820/Society/republic-of-kosovo-becomes-member-of-iba.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120323150127/http://kosovothanksyou.com/organizations/ to http://www.kosovothanksyou.com/organizations/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:01, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on International recognition of Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.interni.segreteria.sm/on-line/Home/DelibereC.d.S..html?P0_path=%2Fhome%2Ftomcat%2Findicizzazione%2Findexdelibere&P0_paginazione=10&P0_pagina=1&P0_oggetto=Kosovo&P0_numero=&P0_data_gg=&P0_data_mm=&P0_data_aa=&annoiniziale=&annofinale=&P0_document=&P0_data_ordered=&P0_maxresults=2000&P0_orderBy=data_ordered%2Cnumero&P0_order=desc%2Casc&P0_operatorMustBe=only&indicericerca=-1&x=0&y=0
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130223095152/http://mre.cancilleria.gov.co/wps/portal/espanol/%21ut/p/c0/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os_jQsKAwo2AXYwN3n2BnA08z82BHf2dfQwMDA_2CbEdFAJSyt1c%21/?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=%2Fwps%2Fwcm%2Fconnect%2FWCM_MENUPRINCIPAL_MRE%2Fmenu+principal%2Frelaciones+internacionales%2Fbilaterales%2Feuropa%2Fkosovo to http://mre.cancilleria.gov.co/wps/portal/espanol/!ut/p/c0/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os_jQsKAwo2AXYwN3n2BnA08z82BHf2dfQwMDA_2CbEdFAJSyt1c!/?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=%2Fwps%2Fwcm%2Fconnect%2FWCM_MENUPRINCIPAL_MRE%2Fmenu+principal%2Frelaciones+internacionales%2Fbilaterales%2Feuropa%2Fkosovo
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120323151335/http://kosovothanksyou.com/files/DominicanRepublicRecognition.pdf to http://kosovothanksyou.com/files/DominicanRepublicRecognition.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120301123720/http://www.top-channel.tv/english/artikull.php?id=2797 to http://www.top-channel.tv/english/artikull.php?id=2797
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140813192042/http://www.solomonstarnews.com/news/national/3456-solomon-islands-recognizes-kosovo-as-independent-state to http://www.solomonstarnews.com/news/national/3456-solomon-islands-recognizes-kosovo-as-independent-state
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160125021539/http://www.orenburg.kp.ru/online/news/147460/ to http://orenburg.kp.ru/online/news/147460/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130709093032/http://www.top-channel.tv/english/artikull.php?id=2657 to http://www.top-channel.tv/english/artikull.php?id=2657
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016112008/http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/docs/RESOLUCAO_RECOCH_KOSOVO.PDF to http://www.1deputyprimeminister-ks.net/repository/docs/RESOLUCAO_RECOCH_KOSOVO.PDF
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090209002721/http://www.newkosovareport.com/200902051597/Politics/The-European-Parliament-urges-recognition-of-Kosovo-by-all-EU-members.html to http://www.newkosovareport.com/200902051597/Politics/The-European-Parliament-urges-recognition-of-Kosovo-by-all-EU-members.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090528000341/http://www.newkosovareport.com/200905251811/Politics/OIC-approves-pro-Kosovo-resolution.html to http://www.newkosovareport.com/200905251811/Politics/OIC-approves-pro-Kosovo-resolution.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080226130650/http://www.newsru.ua/ukraine/22feb2008/djemilev.html to http://www.newsru.ua/ukraine/22feb2008/djemilev.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:56, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on International recognition of Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721223059/http://kosova.org/docs/independence/Portugal.pdf to http://kosova.org/docs/independence/Portugal.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103190018/http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/10/08PHNOMPENH818.html to http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/10/08PHNOMPENH818.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120220103512/http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/02/09PHNOMPENH98.html to http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/02/09PHNOMPENH98.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130609031438/http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/04/09PHNOMPENH232.html to http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/04/09PHNOMPENH232.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120219114659/http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/02/09KINSHASA142.html to http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/02/09KINSHASA142.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160123055037/http://www.mfa.gov.cy/mfa/mfa2006.nsf/All/4A7F43D0FB96F278C2257A2B0046D593 to http://www.mfa.gov.cy/mfa/mfa2006.nsf/All/4A7F43D0FB96F278C2257A2B0046D593
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103191244/http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/03/08GUATEMALA373.html to http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/03/08GUATEMALA373.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140405081213/http://www.kosovapress.com/en/politics/jahjaga-demands-recognition-of-kosova-by-guatemala-13913/ to http://www.kosovapress.com/en/politics/jahjaga-demands-recognition-of-kosova-by-guatemala-13913/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140407081926/http://www.nanngronline.com/section/economy/fg-approves-establishment-of-trade-and-commercial-relations-with-kosovo to http://www.nanngronline.com/section/economy/fg-approves-establishment-of-trade-and-commercial-relations-with-kosovo
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161227221550/http://odili.net/news/source/2011/sep/14/610.html to http://odili.net/news/source/2011/sep/14/610.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103190430/http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/02/09KIGALI91.html to http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/02/09KIGALI91.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103190746/http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/09/09KIGALI585.html to http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/09/09KIGALI585.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103191522/http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/02/08BRIDGETOWN93.html to http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/02/08BRIDGETOWN93.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151127094437/http://www.africa21digital.com/politica/ver/20030295-presidencia-santomense-desmente-reconhecimento-de-kosovo to http://www.africa21digital.com/politica/ver/20030295-presidencia-santomense-desmente-reconhecimento-de-kosovo
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141007063019/http://www.africa21digital.com/politica/ver/20030287-oposicao-critica-presidente-santomense-por-nao-reconhecer-kosovo to http://www.africa21digital.com/politica/ver/20030287-oposicao-critica-presidente-santomense-por-nao-reconhecer-kosovo
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130930114806/http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/02/08PORTOFSPAIN87.html to http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/02/08PORTOFSPAIN87.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710143808/http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/24/kosovo-transnistria-abkhazia-top-level-domains/ to http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/24/kosovo-transnistria-abkhazia-top-level-domains/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:45, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Recognition from Madagascar

[36][37][38] - ILBobby (talk) 00:29, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 February 2018

Move Burundi to the group of countries annulling recognition 46.189.67.3 (talk) 22:50, 19 February 2018 (UTC) https://sputniknews.com/world/201802171061766827-burundi-kosovo-independence/ http://www.msp.gov.rs/sr/index.php/pres-servis/saopstenja/19291-2018-02-17-09-36-57?lang=cyr

•  Not done for now: See the two sections above this one. The discussion about this issue is ongoing. You may join it. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:52, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

What is there to discuss? Burundi withdrew recognition. WickoTeget (talk) 13:21, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Document https://web.archive.org/web/20151012163721/http://www.diplobdi.org/ is exhaustive enough and there is no more justification to leave this issue pending unless other contrary documents can be presented here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.177.47.67 (talk) 14:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Sao Tome recognition is valid

The party of Prime Minister Trovoada return in power and STP have a new president. Presindet Evaristo Carvalho agreed to establish diplomatic rel. w Kosovo. https://twitter.com/pacollibehgjet/status/911204668482768896 79.171.53.80 (talk) 14:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

And from the other side: "Minister Botelho underscored that his country would continue to firmly uphold the position of non-recognition of the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo". TDL (talk) 17:12, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Suriname "un-recognition"

Are there any reliable sources on this? I tried to look for some, but those are either claims by Serbian FM or something like this and both of those seem POV-ish. Right now, the Template:Numrec/Kosovo is not in sync with this page, but I'm hesitant to change it. However, we must either change the template or remove Suriname "un-recognition" from this page. BytEfLUSh | Talk! 04:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Guinea

@AirWolf: Why exactly did you remove the Republic of Guinea from the list of countries that recognize Kosovo's independence [39]? We have sources that say the Republic of Guinea-Bissau revoked its recognition. But, Guinea and Guinea-Bissau are two different countries. Please, put Guinea back and change the number of countries that recognize Kosovo to 109. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:40, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Agreed, I've fixed. TDL (talk) 04:00, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: - my bad.--AirWolf ^talk 08:26, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Barbados recognized Kosovo

Sources here [40] and here [41] alchaemia (talk) 19:30, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Singapore is not green in the map — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salvadorcases (talk • contribs) 12:16, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Guinea-Bissau

Prime Minister of Guinea-Bissau is today in Belgrade and he said that his country never recognized Kosovo independence:

http://www.rts.rs/page/stories/ci/story/1/politika/2942999/gvineja-bisao-demantuje-da-je-priznala-kosovo.html

http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2017&mm=11&dd=17&nav_category=11&nav_id=1326522 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.93.176.254 (talk) 14:25, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Considering a minister traveled from Bissau to Pristina to personally deliver the Note Verable of recognition, I think we should await further news. [42] - ILBobby (talk) 23:02, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Here's a copy of the note verbale revoking recognition: [43]. TDL (talk) 04:00, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

That's a very dubious "note verbale"; it says that it revokes the recognition of the independence of Kosovo (the letter is supposedly addressed to Serbia), but then it takes the opportunity to "avail assurances of its highest regards" to the REPUBLIC OF KOSOVO. --alchaemia (talk) 14:57, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

[44] this appears to be at odds with the above - ILBobby (talk) 16:30, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

FM Pacolli reaffirms--and presents a freshly-received note verbale from Guinea-Bissau--that the latter recognizes Kosovo. See here [45]. alchaemia (talk) 19:02, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

The new Note Verbale says that the withdrawal of recognition was invalid, so the old recognition was never revoked. GB's initial recognition should be restored on the list to its original place, as the January 30th Note was not a new recognition. - ILBobby (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. I've updated. TDL (talk) 02:26, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Just in case it comes up again and someone says Guinea-Bissau "didn't really recognize" Kosovo, as happens from time to time, here's yet another instance of interaction [46] - ILBobby (talk) 03:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Guinea-Bissau Foreign Minister Fabien Sagna traveled to Prishtina where he met with President Thaci and Foreign Minister to hand-deliver the note verbale of recognition, and to reconfirm once again that Guinea Bissau recognizes Kosovo. Source in Albanian and English [47], [48] alchaemia (talk) 16:29, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Consistency

There are 112 countries in the list, while the main text says 113. Guinea bissau is not in the list while it is in the map. I know that you guys don't agree in the exact number, but at least you should agree that your disagreements are not reflected in the article.--Salvadorcases (talk) 12:16, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

112 + one that has revoked the recognition (Suriname) = 113. Guinea Bissau is on the list No. 74. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:29, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

OK. Then what I would say is that it looks inconsistent.--Salvadorcases (talk) 22:44, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Burundi I

@Emk9: Regarding your edit, where exactly the source says that "Burundi denies claim"? I can't find it. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:39, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

https://telegrafi.com/keshilltari-pacollit-thote-se-lajmi-per-terheqje-te-njohjes-nga-burundi-nuk-eshte-vertete/ Emk9 (talk) 18:40, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

headline according to google translate "Pacolli's advisor says the news of the withdrawal of recognition from Burundi is not true" Oh, now I see that Burundi didn't deny it, my mistake Emk9 (talk) 18:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

So, what should we do with Burundi? Kosovan minister claims that Burundi did not revoke recognition, but Serbian source ([49]) provides a document of the revoke. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

What's been done in the past for this page? I'll look through the archives Emk9 (talk) 19:42, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

That's a lot of archives. It seems usually only Kosovo or the recognizing nation's statements were taken into account, but in this case there is an image of Burundi's statement. Assuming it says what the article claims (I used google translate on one paragraph and it seems to, though somebody who can read french would be ideal), Burundi should probably be moved to withdrawn, especially since if they no longer recognize the government of Kosovo, they wouldn't be sending statements directly to Kosovo Emk9 (talk) 19:55, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't see anything on that page confirming that Burundi has withdrawn recognition. It's not clear what's on second page of the document, and in fact Burundi has also argued in front of the ICJ back in 2012 in support of Kosovo as an independent country. Either way, if it's confirmed it'll be an odd one taking into account Burundi's position in the past and its argument in support of Kosovo in front of the ICJ. Source for the ICJ argument by Burundi here [50] alchaemia (talk) 20:14, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@Alchaemia: You say that the fact that Burundi supported Kosovo's independence in 2010 is an evidence that recognition is not withdrawn. I have to remind you that to "withdraw" means exactly that: to change position, not to support something that one have supported in the past. We all agree here that Burundi was once recognizing Kosovo independence, we don't need evidence for that. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:52, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I didn't say that at all, so way to twist my words. I said that it would be odd--not impossible--for a state that not only recognized Kosovo but that has actively supported its independence in front of the International Court of Justice, to withdraw recognition a few years later. alchaemia (talk) 14:43, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

But it did - so, what's the hold-up? Remove it from the list. WickoTeget (talk) 16:40, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

It's not at all clear that it did - that note verbale looks incredibly suspicious (a "@yahoo.fr" e-mail, inexistent website, etc.) alchaemia (talk) 20:50, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Are you saying it's fake? WickoTeget (talk) 13:11, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm saying it's not at all as confirmed as some people are claiming. alchaemia (talk) 16:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Seems pretty confirmed - there's a link to a document that proves that in this very section of the talk page. I see no reason to keep Burundi on the list "Entities that recognise...". WickoTeget (talk) 18:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

The original note verbale has been published - [51]. Without a shadow of a doubt, it says "Government of the Republic of Burundi [...] 3° revokes the recognition of Kosovo".--Avala (talk) 13:27, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Kinda fishy that the address on gmaps points to a cremeriè, that diplodbi.org is not accessible, that the official website is http://www.burundi.gov.bi/ and that the email in that paper address is hosted on yahoo.fr ErmirI 20:43, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

The web page is down, but the archive shows it is the page of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation (http://www.burundi.gov.bi/ is the page of the Government of Burundi). And the address does match. Google Maps gives the correct address when searched for "Ministère des Relations Extérieures et de la Coopération Internationale" ( [52]). Vanjagenije (talk) 22:37, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

The website is registered to "MINISTERE DES RELATIONS EXTERIEURES ET DE LA COOPERATION INTERNATIONALE DU BURUNDI" and it's linked from other seemingly authoritative sites (ie the US embassy) so it seem legitimate to me. Likewise, the email address can be found listed on government websites (ie the French embassy).

I think that Burundi should be moved to the states which have revoked recognition now. TDL (talk) 03:45, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

It passed 7 days. Let us suppose that Foreign Ministry of Serbia issued on TV a false note verbale. Any state would react in a such case because this is a scandal in international relations. Burundi would issued announcement denying the claim of Serbia. I remind you about case of Mali, where foreign ministry of 'Kosovo*' showed false document which was denounced by the President of Mali. So it is shame that you are rejecting the obvious facts. You may support party you wished, but if you are doing for wikipedia you should be at least professional to not neglect true that Burundi clearly revokes the recognition. This is unethical behavior. Also, Guinea Bissau revoked and then reaffirmed recognition again because previous prime minister resigned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.189.67.3 (talk) 23:15, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Ask @Vanjagenije: why there is no change. He is following this page closely and has reverted previous edits who are in line with the sources that say Burundi revoked recognition. He is also waiting for some kind of "consensus" even though he has been provided with sources and many days passed already. Tempsuspen (talk) 13:06, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I guess we have consensus to move Burundi to those that revoked recognition. I am going to make that edit now. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:59, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Burundi II

Burundi recently withdrew its recognition for Kosovo, the page doesn't say anything about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MosuFan2004 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

@MosuFan2004: See the section above this one. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:22, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Please wait. Dačić said also that Guyana withdrew the recognition and that wasn‘t true. At the moment serbian sources aren’t seriously. --Elmedinfeta (talk) 17:11, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

@Elmedinfeta: Can you provide a source of that information about Dačić saying that Guyana withdrew the recognition? Vanjagenije (talk) 19:43, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes. I‘m sorry. I mean Gambia. [53] It isn‘t also true. I know that Facebook isn‘t a good source but Pacolli writes that Dačić wants Kosovo to provoke at the independent day as he said that Burundi withdraw the recognition Ici-cij.org, Facebook post --Elmedinfeta (talk) 21:18, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

@Elmedinfeta: That sources does not say that Dačić said Gambia withdrew recognition. Did you even read it? It says that Dačić "proposed" that Gambia "reconsider" its decision. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:55, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Serbia says Burundi withdrew recongnition, Kosovo says it did not. Why should we believe Serbia and not Kosovo or vice versa? Some time ago another African country was said to had done same, but in the end it was proved that the withdrawal claims were false. Since the government of Burundi has not commented on the withdrawal claims yet, it is premature to make changes to the situation of recongnistion of Kosovo by Burundi. Burundi should be kept in the list of countries that recongnise Kosovo together with a note on claims by Serbia about a possible withdrawal of recognition. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I can support this argument. But still I think that Burundi has to be kept only in the list of countries that recongnise Kosovo. See german Wikipedia --Elmedinfeta (talk) 21:18, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

@Ktrimi991: Why should we believe Serbia? Because Serbian side provided an official document from Burundi's Ministry of foreign affairs, and because Burundi did not dispute that document. Serbian Ministry of Foreign affairs also published photos of Burundi foreign minister Alain Aimé Nyamitwe signing the said note verbale and giving it to Dačić [54]. If you think that this source is not reliable, you have to refute it with some arguments. We don't dismiss sources just because someone says they are wrong. You have to prove they are (probably) wrong some way. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:55, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Serbia provides documents, Kosovo as well [55]. Guinea-Bissau was inolved in a similar situation some time ago, where both Serbia and Kosovo provided documents, and Guinea-Bissau refuted the withdrawal claims later than a week after those claims emerged. In the past Kosovo presented documents of recognition by countries that later dismissed to had done so. This war of words between Kosovo and Serbia is part of propaganda, and editors should not be tricked by it. By the way, why do you claim that consenus is to place Burundi in the list of countries that have withdrawn recognition? Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

How can a document from 2010 be an evidence that something didn't happen in 2018? Are you joking? I totally agree with you that this is propaganda, and editors should not be tricked by it. That is why I insisted that we analyze all sources and discuss the issue before making edits. But, yes, I say that now we have consensus for this edit because nobody gave any evidence to refute the official document. In Wikipedia, consensus is measured by the strength of arguments (see WP:CONSENSUS), not by the number of !votes. I still see no evidence that the document is false. Papers from 2010 are certainly not an evidence that a 2018 document is false. If you want, you can make a WP:RfC, but that would be a waste of time, because you can't provide any arguments. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:26, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

The document of 2010 is the last document regarding status of recongnition by Burundi that Kosovo has recieved. If a country changes its position on such issues, it sends documents to all parties/countries involved. In this case, Burundi should send relevant official documents to both Kosovo and Serbia. On concensus, nah, I do not see it. You changed some content of the article today, and those changes are being disputed. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

No, actually I changed the content of the article eight days ago [56]. After it was disputed, I waited for eight days for consensus to build. I even reverted those who wanted to make the same change [57][58] because I thought we should give chance to all editors to provide sources and arguments about this dispute. Since after eight days there were no reliable sources that dispute the originality of the document, I concluded that we have consensus to make that edit. If you don't agree with me, you can ask for WP:THIRDOPINION or WP:RfC. Your argument that Burundi needs to send the all parties is, of course, wrong becaouse (a) why would they send anything to someone they do not recognize, and (b) even if they did send it, why would the Government of Kosovo reveal it. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:51, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Well, the pre dispute version was that Burundi currently recognises Kosovo. You, one of socks of VJ-Yugo, someone else, whoever changed it did so in face of lack of consensus. Since it is you, not me, who insists in some changes to the pre dispute version of the article, it is on your onus to persuade me for your preferred version. If you do not have any other argument, I am going to revert you. Of course, you can open a RfC if you wish. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:01, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

No, it is not my onus to persuade you. It is my onus to provide reliable sources for proposed edits, which I (and other editors) did. If you wand to dispute those sources, then it is your onus to provide reliable sources that dispute my sources, something that you still did not do. You can't force something out of Wikipedia just because you don't like it, even if no one likes it. So, please, stop WP:WIKILAWYERING and start providing some real evidence for your position (aside from 8 years old documents). What was "pre dispute version" of the article is irrelevant here, because there was no issue to discuss before the disputed withdrawal happened. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:13, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

You think my source is irrelevant, I do not think so. Add a note on Burundi, open a RfC or stick to other articles. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:26, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Vanjagenije. Obviously a source from 2010 has no bearing on whether recognition was revoked in 2018.

Ktrimi991, your statement that "it sends documents to all parties/countries involved" is purely a guess on your side. And even if we accept your assumption as fact, the point is that Burundi no longer thinks that Kosovo exists as a country, so it would contradict this fundamental position to inform Kosovo. And if you want to take this position consistently, you would naturally need to accept the converse: if states don't inform Serbia of their recognition it can't be true? What evidence do you have that any of the states listed as recognizing Kosovo have informed Serbia of their decision? Or to use your logic, "why should we believe Kosovo"?

We have to go with the best available sources, and at this point that points to recognition being withdrawn. If further evidence surfaces later we can update. Likewise, when Serbia disputes a recognition, but can't produce and hard evidence, we keep it in the recognition column pending better evidence.

Note that your summary of the Guinea-Bissau situation is not accurate. GB acknowledged the original note of November 2017 in the note of January 2018, but "invalidated" it. So even retrospectively, between those two notes the only reasonable conclusion was that their position was non-recognition. (There was a change in PM during the interim, which likely explains the flip-flop.) TDL (talk) 00:44, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Wrong. That Kosovo should recieve a notification for a withdrawal of recognition is not my guess, it is what my source (officials of the gov of Kosovo) says. In the case of Suriname, it was not just Serbia that spoke about withdrawal but reliable media, Western and Balkan one. Some media like Balkans Insight even published some analysis on the outcome of withdrawal. Guinea-Bissau, claims about withdrawal of its recognition were even accepted by a large segment of Albanian media, though later those claims were nullified. Whatever happened with GB's recognition, it just proves my words that delicate actions need time and reliable sources to be rightly evaluated. Years ago Kosovo's officials claimed to had recieved documents of recognition from coutries that later refused to had done so. After a long time of flip-flops and false claims by both sides (Kosovo and Serbia), I doubt just another one-sided and not supported by reliable media (and Burundi itself has not commented yet) claim should serve as a reason to change so much stuff on the article. If you do not prove that Burundi withdrew recognition with sources like reliable media (no Albanian, Serbian, Sputnik and other of that kind), I ask you to revert the current version and place a note on claims of Serbia and Kosovo regarding Burundi. Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:28, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

From an easy Google search Several years ago, there were dilemmas about the actions of Sao Tome and Principe when it comes to recognizing Kosovo, and there was also a mention of revocations of recognition by African countries that remained unnamed. During a summit of the Non-Aligned Movement(NAM) in Belgrade media reported that Oman and Guinea Bissau had revoked their recognitions, but this was later denied. Vuk Jeremic, at the time Serbia’s foreign minister, said that these two countries never recognized Kosovo in the first place, and that he received assurances of this from their officials, adding that “two NAM countries had launched procedures to revoke their recognitions.” [59]. Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:46, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: What you say on this source? I think we have to focus more on the kosovan government. They added Barbados in the past and does‘nt removed Burundi or Suriname. Suriname wrote an officially withdrew to the UN...ok. Kosovo said we don‘t take a note verbal. But Burundi havn‘t wrote about a withdrew or wrote something to the UN but remind the Resolution 1244. So, Burundi still recognize Kosovo. --Elmedinfeta (talk) 13:52, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

That's not new source, that is the same source we've been discussing here (the Government of Kosovo). Vanjagenije (talk) 18:32, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Kosovo can complain that Burundi should notify them if they change their mind, but obviously they're under no obligation to do so just because Kosovo thinks that they should.

Here's a quote from Burundi's FM confirming the withdrawal:

In 2012, Burundi recognized Kosovo as an independent state, but in the meantime, we had the opportunity to reconsider our position and found that it is only good to reconsider this position and strengthen the good and excellent relations that existed between the former Yugoslavia and Burundi. ... We have returned to our position since before 2012, which means that we have relations with the Republic of Serbia only.

— Alan Aime Njamitev [60][61]

Pacolli seems to concede here that Burundi has withdrawn recognition here:

Kosovo’s First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs said that Pristina "would not be surprised if more countries emerged that will withdraw their recognition" – noting however that this will not be the case with "serious countries with an old tradition of democracy." “We have taken all measures to prevent this from happening. I hope this country will soon invite us to establish diplomatic ties,” Pacolli said during an interview with KTV."

— Behgjet Pacolli [62]

TDL (talk) 02:22, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Article Table Structure

There is a discussion currently ongoing on the template talk page of Template talk:Numrec#Withdrawn Recognition Currently not Subtracting from the Number of Recognitions that might affect the structure of the first two tables within this article. Please comment on that talk page to discuss. - Wiz9999 (talk) 13:17, 12 June 2018 (UTC)