Talk:Serb enclaves in Kosovo

NPOV in many other articles

I, at least in my own opinion, find not only this article "Kosovo Serb enclaves" and the articles "Kosovo", but also many other related documents about Kosovo : UNMIK, Kosovo War, KFOR.... much like tilting towards Serbian-Nationalist side of viewpoint. It could had been the same author in all these doucments.

I had edit some parts of these 5 documents, not all and not quite much. but in my free time i tried to rectify these articles towards Wiki neutral traditions later. Cat12.

Re: NPOV in many other articles

The following are removed, which at least IMO are not neutral and definitely a volatile info. (The Kosovo Serbs, like many other ethnics, are scattered in Kosovo and not just some finite number of places)..Cat12:

• Ibarski Kolasin around Northern Kosovska Mitrovica, Leposavic, Zubin Potok and Zvecan
• Sirinicka Zupa with center in Strpce
• Kosovosko Pomoravlje around Gnjilane and Kosovska Kamenica
• Priluzje
• Gracanica with Laplje Selo
• Goraždevac
• Bica
• Velika Hoca

What's this page about? A place? --Yacht 11:37, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)

NPOV

I don't think "Kosovo Serb Enclaves are the few remaining areas of ... Kosovo where Serbs, Roma and other minorities live peacefully without the constant violence and intimidation (ethnic cleansing) of their Albanian neighbours" (Italics added for emphasis) is a very neutral way of putting it. Aecis

! agree. Nikola 10:03, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No argumet

No argumet!!! please dont inteprete the documents

Sombody have putit this Kosovo place in Serbia stub or category or template here with out argumet. We dont have a argumet that Kosovo is part of S/M. We have tha Constitution of this countrie but we have the rez. 1244 wich is more importen for the Wikipedia and is saying that Kosovo it is a part of Yougoslavia and is prototoriat of UN. Till we dont have a clearly argument from UN, aricel about Kosovo must be out of this stub or category or template. Pleas dont make the discution with intepretation or the Law wich are not accordin to 1244. Everybodoy can do that but that is nothing for Wikipedia.--Hipi Zhdripi 04:35, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Kosovo Serb enclaves

The part witch dont have to do with serbs in Kosovo, must be delete from this article. I remenber you the article name is Serbs enclaves E.x Gora is not enklave and even ist a komunë. See the oficila side of Dragash.

---

The copetent peopel (organisation) about the Kosovo statistic OSCE, is saying : It is noted that the 1991 census was highly politicised and is thus unreliable., beacouse of thate this NOTE must be putit in the data. E.x see: [1] --Hipi Zhdripi 00:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Maybe we can change name of the article into "Serb and Slavic Muslim inhabited areas in Kosovo" or something like that? PANONIAN (talk) 00:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

We dont need that. You are compicetend. The static is clear the officel names of the ethnic group are in the documents, we dont need to imagened a new ethnic groups (they have dont). And what is more importen they wasen t under the pressur fom no one. Ther is one importen componet "nationality of the group" not somthing else. I understand you wish to make another selected group "religion" but you are going to far with your selectiv groups. I dont know if this peopel wont to be declared als Slave, Bulgarien, Bisanti, Albanian or what a know. There are no sicen argument witch are profing thate they are clear slavonic peopel. I thik (I think) that from languege they speek not serbian or slavonic bout old Prizren dialect from Ottoman L, is not clear turkish but mixed bugarien, albanian (south), serbian and mostly turkish, it was spoket in the area of Shkup Vilajet from Prizren to Sofje. Some albanans in this area speek the south dialect (toske or what I now Dibrançe, enyway it songs not so hard like in Prishtina is more influenced and some words are clean old gegë and tradiciona greece/ not new greece). My opinion for thes peopel is that they are Dacia/ Vllahë --Hipi Zhdripi 17:26, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

This article must be merget

This article must be merge with Serbs in Kosovo it hase no sens if we start to make articels for each folk in the world or we are going to make the article about the albanians in Serbia (Blgrade, Novi Sad)--Hipi Zhdripi 17:13, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd support merging with Serbs in Kosovo, because this is covering basically the same information. In fact that article already has the map from here and as far as I can tell basically all the information that this one contains. --Delirium 08:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Disagree - two different things. --PaxEquilibrium 09:33, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Disagree 99.236.221.124 (talk) 13:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree; as far as I'm concerned, it has no sense to talk about "enclaves" in a disputed territory like Kosovo. Oikema (talk) 19:20, 26 April 2010 (UTC).

About the external link to www.kosovocompromise.com

I’ve removed the site above from the “External links” setion because though it seems at first a non-biased site (an egg with a half-Albanina, hal-Serbian eagle pictured on), entering the site one can see that all the text presented on it the same old same Serb nationalist cheap talk that we see since Milosevic times. And the link per se is not even related to this article, simce is much more like Serbian government advocacy than any comprehensive and serius description about Serbian-populated areas in Kosovo (see Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability for background).

Other thing to note: the site is allegedly from a so-called “4S Institute” that claims it’s “localized in Brussels”, but in fact it should be remebered that “4S” means “Only Unity Saves the Serbs”, the same old religious-nationalistic slogan that Arkan and other forces at the service of the Milosevic regime used as a motto during the campaing of genocide during Yugoslav Wars. And a basic Whois search show that, in fact, the site www.kosovocompromise.com wasn’t registered in Brussels, but by someone living in the Serbian city of Kovin…--MaGioZal 04:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

What about an international protectorate as in Bosnia with two parliaments for Kosovo? What about an independent Vojvodina? (86.134.27.216 (talk) 17:25, 26 February 2008 (UTC))

This article should be renamed

I would propose that this article is urgently renamed and thouroughly edited, and that all references to "Serb enclaves" in Kosovo are removed from Wikipedia. The new name could be "Serb majority municipalities in Kosovo". There are no "Serb enclaves" in Kosovo today. With the exception of four municipalities in northern Kosovo (which are not "enclaves") there are a number of legally functioning Serb majority municipalities in Kosovo. These are fully integrated into the Kosovo state and have municipal bodies (assemblies etc) elected according to Kosovo state laws. The assertion that freedom of movement for citizens of the Serb majority municipalities is restricted is totally unfounded today. The Serb majority municipalities are interacting with the Kosovo state and government like any other municipalities in Kosovo and travel is completely unrestricted. Civil protection in these municipalities is provided by Kosovo Police (KP), which has police commanders nominated by the municipalities, but formally elected by the Government of Kosovo. The religious and cultural heritage monuments are with a small number of exceptions protected only by Kosovo Police (the exceptions are the Pec patriarchate and Visoki Decani monastery, which still have KFOR protection). — Preceding unsigned comment added by BalkanMan (talk • contribs)

• I'd support renaming the article along these lines. bobrayner (talk) 13:02, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
• Indeed, there are no such entities in Kosovo nowadays i.e. I support the proposal, though the article should cover all minority majority municipalities like Mamushë or parts of Dragash. --— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 12:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose per sources and most common use. You must use RM template for these kind of moves, so this unconventional proposal is not enough. --WhiteWriter^speaks 21:01, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Please stick to the sources WW. Your view that these are enclaves without any rights and under constant repression etc. doesn't correspond to reality. In fact the 2012 report of the Helsinki Committee of Serbia[2] paints a very different picture. --— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 22:54, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Name

• "Serbian enclaves in Kosovo" (21)
• "Serb enclaves in Kosovo" (4)
• "Kosovo Serb enclaves" (2)

Gbooks hits.--Zoupan 21:32, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Serbian enclaves in 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.serbia.sr.gov.yu/coordination_centre/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080219224304/http://www.refugees.org/countryreports.aspx?id=1624 to http://www.refugees.org/countryreports.aspx?id=1624
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100330054013/http://www.radiokontaktplus.rs/ to http://www.radiokontaktplus.rs/

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) 10:47, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 21 February 2024

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. – robertsky (talk) 18:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

---

Serbian enclaves in Kosovo → Serb enclaves in Kosovo – The article is about communities with ethnic Serb majorities, not about territorial enclaves of Serbia, so "Serb enclave" is less ambiguous and more precise than "Serbian enclave".
Also, "Serb enclave" is commonly used by reliable sources:

• Academic articles: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7
• Agence France-Presse (AFP): 1, 2, 3
• Associated Press (AP): 1, 2
• Reuters: 1, 2
• The Guardian: 1
• The New York Times: 1, 2
• Bonn International Centre for Conflict Studies: 1
• Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia: 1
• International Crisis Group: 1

— MarkH₂₁^talk 16:41, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Support per nominator, also makes it more clear that these are ethnic enclaves. Killuminator (talk) 21:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Support Excellent sourcing provided by nom. Proposed move would represent a more accurate title. AusLondonder (talk) 15:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.