![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
Is the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Committee for Foreign Affairs Oleh Bilorus (who is against the independence of Kosovo) a member of the governing coalition or the opposition? -- Camptown ( talk) 19:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Does it make any sense to include information on armed forces of countries that support or not Kosovo ? Information from Kosovo Force is important enough. -- TAG ( talk) 19:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Someone added them to the list. The referenced article just states the added positions. Did their UN ambassadors say these things? Did the Moroccan and Sudanese FM's say anything? The article does not say. Without any official from the governments or ministry statement, I think these ought to be removed. Ajbenj ( talk) 00:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
The Chechen Republic of Ichkeria has less power then the Principality of Minerva. In other words they are pretty powerless and their stance is irrelevant, as no one (except the Taliban) recognizes Chechen existence, or their government-in-exile. Can someone just remove them from the list? Thanks. Otherwise I might start a Republic of Redheadia and recognize Vermont as Independent. The end result should be the same as Chechen recognition or lack thereof - zilch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.165.20.90 ( talk) 07:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Umm, the source for Chechnya, "Chechenpress (www.chechenpress.info/index.shtml) is a website linked to London-based Chechen rebel leader Ahmed Zakayev." London-based Chechen rebel leader. Is London getting two votes now? Or was Russia to give up Lugovoi to London to be questioned by Zakayev. But I digress. Case in point, it's a government without a country to rule, and they're not even in the country, so the source gives a false impression. Can we at least changed the name to "London-based gov't. for the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria?"
67.101.109.142 (
talk)
09:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
how is the position of Spain different from that of Brazil? Spain said "secession requires a U.N. Security Council resolution". Brazil said "the matter is before the UN Security Council". These states do not appear to even have an opinion on the question, they just say they will be happy to endorse anything the UN Security Council comes up with. I suggest the "orange" countries should be those that said they will follow whatever the UN decides, while the "red" countries should be those that said they will not recognize Kosovo unless there a "mutually accepted solution", viz. an agreement with Serbia. -- dab (𒁳) 09:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict)
POLISH GOVERMENT WILL BE TOMORROW RECOGNISE KOSOWO http://fakty.interia.pl/raport/kosowo/news/tusk-nie-nalezy-krzywdzic-serbow,1064715,2943 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.158.196.67 ( talk) 10:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Dear Camptown, I am sorry I couldn't clean up the links, I was interrupted and didn't get back to computer until now.
Would you care to explain what do you mean by "seek some support", and why you didn't voice your opposition before the move? The issue was raised on the talk page, about four people agreed with the move, and nobody disagreed in the course of over two days. -- EJ ( talk) 14:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
There are 23 states that do not recognize People's Republic of China. Shall we move PRC to this section?
Vincent.ws.kuo ( talk) 15:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
No because the PRC is on the UN security council. Partially recognised states is for non UN members. Ijanderson977 ( talk) 16:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
I think that Armenia should be moved from undecided to mildly-against-independence [1] in the tables and in the map. Can someone do it? Best, Lubos -- Lumidek ( talk) 18:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
It says that its not to recognise Kosovo "yet", therefore suggesting it will in the future. So it is in the correct group. Ijanderson977 ( talk) 19:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
No, Armenia is not against: "Armenia has no intention to recognize independence of Kosovo yet, RA Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian said in Yerevan today." Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=25057 So should we not correct the article as it is clear that Armenia will sooner or later recognise? -- Tubesship ( talk) 06:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
So,...
Where is Indonesia in whole of that news sources mess??
I've read all previous posts on Indonesian position and you'll probably figure out what i am trying to say...
This is only Indonesian example.
There are, no doubt, many more, to show how some highly relevant info could became suspicious and hard to verify
Indonesia says it does not recognize Kosovo's independence
(Reuters)
http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24905
(Associated Press - Jakarta Post)
http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/ap/20080218/tap-as-gen-indonesia-kosovo-64ed358.html
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/indonesia-says-it-does-not-recognize/n20080217230809990006
(TANJUG)
http://www.mfa.gov.yu/Policy/CI/KIM/180208_8_e.html
No Reason For Indonesia Not To Recognize Kosovo's Independence
(ANTARA)
http://www.antara.co.id/en/arc/2008/2/18/ri-yet-to-recognize-kosovo-independence/
(Bernama)
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/news_lite.php?id=314952
Indonesia delayed decision to recognize Kosovo’s independence
(Jakarta Post)
http://www.ereos.com/post/indonesia-delayed-decision-to-recognize-kosovos-independence/
(ANTARA)
http://indonesia-oslo.no/Political-Affairs/Indonesia-In-No-Hurry-To-Recognize-Kosovo-S-Independence-FM.html 79.101.172.143 ( talk) 20:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Indonesia's position is purposely unclear. When Indonesia officially announces it, we will know. I thought we are going by official announcements here, not newspaper ramblings. According to the Washington Post Russia should really, really recognize Kosovo and begin giving free oil to the US. Case in point: newspapers are not credible, only official announcement made by heads of state, either the leader of the Executive Branch or the Legislative Branch should be posted here.
68.166.129.105 (
talk)
09:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I just heard on the news that The king of Belgium sent the note to kosovo that belgium recognized kosovo , please try to find some sources-- Cra del 20:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
For how long does Serbia officially plan to withdraw its ambassadors from the countries which have recognized the independence of Kosovo? -- Camptown ( talk) 21:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Warsaw Business Journal announced that "Poland recognizes Kosovo's independence", but it says "PM Donald Tusk announced that the official decision on this issue will be made by the Cabinet later today."
Did it recognize it already or not? :-) bogdan ( talk) 00:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Given the Mujahadeen sent a number of fighters to Kosovo in the 1990s, as did Al-Queda, is there any information on their reaction to indpendence? Obviously its hard to get a comment from Al-Queda, but what about Mujahadeen, Islamic Jihad who would obviously be pro-independence one would imagine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.96.72 ( talk) 04:45, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Please have these two areas grayed out on the map, as they both said that they will wait until the UN Security Council announces its decision. Oh wait, that's where Russia's got the veto. Please switch Portugal and Malta from blue to orange, because saying "we will wait for Russia to veto" is like saying "we won't recognize those suckers, sorry". 68.166.129.105 ( talk) 09:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
The "Other states, including undecided or ambiguous positions" includes some states which have not initiated proceedings to recognise Kosovo but generally agree on the independence. So that doesn't make their position "undecided or ambiguous". These states are:
These countries need a new section, something like "Countries that support the independence but have not initiated formal proceedings" Bardhylius ( talk) 14:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Czcech Republic needs to be in the "have initiated the formal proceedings" my source = http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/8185/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kosova2008 ( talk • contribs) 03:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I think that is obvious that Kosovars will not compete under Serbian flag and by the way according to the source [4] the declaration regarding this issue clearly states in the article what I mentioned above. The following is a short piece of that statement:
Short of full recognition, the IOC could allow Kosovar athletes to compete as independent competitors under the Olympic flag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenClawPrishtina ( talk • contribs) 18:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Regarding Bosnia and Herzegovina, its true that is a blocked process for the moment but no official statement from the Foreign Affairs Ministry has been issued in the Name of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Statement has been Issued only by Republika Srpska as one Entity. So I guess Republika Srpska as an Entity should be listed where it was before but Bosnia and Herzegovina should be removed from the existing list for lack of official declaration. I Think somebody in here is keeping score hahaha. As soon as somebody recognizes Republic of Kosova they try to add more states on the non recognition part so it gains something for the eye. BE EXACT, PRECISE AND FAIR IN YOUR EDITS PLEASE!!! - This is not politics, it's an International Encyclopedia and we should publish only the truth, no matter of the results.
Well doubts and other things are our personal feelings, but these do not express nor do they represent the reality of the political situation. It may be obvious that the recognition may be far away or non existent but still Bosnia and Herzegovina has issued no official statement about this issue. And since we are citing only Official and direct statements from Foreign Affairs Ministries of the Actual States and not single entities on that section, i think BiH should not be there. On the Other Hand Republika Srpska should stay on the Other Entities List. -- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 19:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
AVALA.. Where is the Source for the latest news?-- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 19:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
"BANjALUKA, 21. FEBRUARA (SRNA) - Član Predsjedništva BiH iz Republike Srpske Nebojša Radmanović izjavio je da BiH neće priznati nezavisnost Kosova". This sounds pretty official - member of the presidency says that Bosnia will not recognize Kosovo. --
Avala (
talk)
19:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
And the source is there where you deleted it when you vandalized the article - http://www.rtrs.tv/vijesti/vijest.php?id=49754.
First of all I did not vandalize anything. Second, this is the Television of the Republika Srpska and not an Official Government Statement. All the other Sources are. Why cant you accept this? I don't Understand. If it's so important to you that put it there, but don't expect us to believe in some TV Agency.
Član Predsjedništva is one Member, one person and it's not the Foreign Affairs Minister of BiH.-- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 19:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Unless you can find a source for your statements I will consider any removal of sourced material as vandalism. As someone mentioned before, don't use Wikipedia as playground for expressing your frustrations. If you don't believe news agencies then you can remove 90% of all wikipedia references. And also there are two references for Bosnia, one is the parliament of RS website where you can read all about B&H not recognizing Kosovo due to effective veto from RS. -- Avala ( talk) 19:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Man I think you are frustrated. Your Source is not valid. it's not official, i don't think you understand at this point. As long as it seems obvious that BiH will not recognize Kosovo, I repeat there is no Government Statement that says that. Foreign Affairs Statements from BiH are valid ones FOLKS and not one Entity Statements like Republika Srpska - REPUBLIKA SRPSKA is a part of Bosnia and Herzegovina, but she is not the only entity in that state. There are 2 entities and the process is blocked. So no BiH Statement, Only one Entity Statement.-- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 20:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Parliament of Republika Srpska is a valid official source unlike your hopes which have nothing to do with the official position of Bosnia. Republika Srpska as an equal entity has blocked recognition initiative and after that member of the presidency said Bosnia will not recognize Kosovo independence. I think this is clear as day. -- Avala ( talk) 20:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
We need another opinion since you and I obviously do not agree.-- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 20:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
You are the only one who claims news agency and official statement are not valid enough. -- Avala ( talk) 20:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Should one Entity of one State should be considered as a STATE? I dont think so!!! .. News Agency - Not Good Enough for the part Recognition - Non Recognition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenClawPrishtina ( talk • contribs) 20:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry if one entity disagrees Bosnia cannot recognize Kosovo and that is what the member of the presidency summed up in his statement. Look at it this way - EU can't recognize Kosovo because of Spain, UN because of Russia and Bosnia because of RS. -- Avala ( talk) 20:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok let me make it simple. The obvious thing to me as well is that there will be no recognition from Bosnia and Herzegovina, at least not in the near future, this is where we agree OK. The question is should we publish also News Agency Statements and Articles for the Recognition and Non Recognition lists or should we publish only Foreign Affairs Ministry, Presidential etc.(NON NEWS AGENCY) statements? This is all. This is where the issue is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenClawPrishtina ( talk • contribs) 20:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Regarding recognition yes because that is what is needed - an official document but if the state does not recognize they do not have to publish an official document stating so because they legally consider the situation has not changed. They are just not required to do so. Their recognition of Serbia is sufficient. If they think something changed, that there is a new country they publish a statement about it. -- Avala ( talk) 20:32, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
As I understand it, the Republika Serpska is not merely just some autonomous political "entity" that's separate from the Bosnian government; it is an integral part of the federal Bosnian government. So, while it is true to say that a declaration from the Republika Serpska is not the same as a declaration by the full government of Bosnia and Herzegovina, it IS, nevertheless, a declaration from a major official branch of the Bosnian government.
Bosnia and Herzegovina obviously differs from countries that have made an official declaration for or against recognition, and also differs from countries in the process of making one. Countries in the process of recognizing basically have one political entity (a foreign minister, a cabinet, parliament, or head of state) endorsing recognition, and the other branches of government must then ratify it to make it official. But, in the Bosnian case, you have one side flatly declaring there is no recognition of Kosovo, and another side saying they do not oppose recognition. Neither side is going to ratify the position of the other, so they are deadlocked, and the full government will neither fully support or fully oppose Kosovan independance.
The most appropriate category for this, I think is the undecided/ambiguous category, because, even though the subnational branches of Bosnian government, like Republika Serpska, clarified their own positions, the full government has no position, and will not have one until everyone agrees on it. But one thing is clear, the government of Bosnia and Herzegovina neither officially opposes not officially recognizes independence.
The mere fact that they probably won't recognize Kosovo is insufficient to place it in the opposing group, because there's lots of countries that won't recognize it soon, or in the forseeable future, but are still in the undecided list because they have not declared a position, and at least in theory, Bosnia is a potential Kosovo supporter until its government can agree one way or another; only countries whose governments officially refuse to recognize Kosovo go in the non-recognition list. I say place Bosnia in the undecided section.-- Supersexyspacemonkey ( talk) 23:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
So based Željko Komšić statement 17/02 is more important then Nebojša Radmanović statement 21/02 as I can see that statement is now a reference for Bosnia. I am sorry but the member of federal presidency said on 21/02 - Bosnia and Herzegovina will not recognize Kosovo. Twisting this in any direction will not bring anything new because the statement is very clear.-- Avala ( talk) 00:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
We have been through this before with Ukraine. There is no statement whatsoever at the Foreign Affairs Ministry of Armenia regarding the article presented here as a source from the Armenian news. Even if you used that source as a starting point for assuming something about a possible statement from the Ministry reading this article you will understand that no final position has been reached at this present time. The article clearly states: The issue is under discussion and the decision will be announced when the time comes, according to RA Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian.
So this means that no parliament or cabinet or presidential or official Foreign Affairs Ministry conclusion has been reached till today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenClawPrishtina ( talk • contribs) 19:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Russian President made an Official Statement... thats very different. The Russian Representative at the UN Security Council made it very official. You can not say the did not. We went through this with Ukraine. all the other sources have Official Government Statements on the Non-Recognition Part.-- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 19:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
And it's not about what i like or dislike. Just go to the Armenian Foreign Affairs ministry WebSite and see if there is any statement of that kind.... The Issue about Russia is very clear and we don't need to discuss it here. I think that their statements at the UN Security Council made it very OFFICIAL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenClawPrishtina ( talk • contribs) 19:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
It did but according to your comments one country must publish a formal statement on paper and on all gov websites to make it legal. That goes for recognition but legally country does not have to publish anything if it doesn't recognize as it just accepts previous situation as the correct situation. -- Avala ( talk) 20:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, unless something has changed in the rules regarding the publishing of information on WP than I'm sorry for the noise caused, but as far as I know about the Recognition and Non Recognition lists we published only official Government Statements. If I'm wrong than for god's sake put everything like it was, and I wont touch it. And we should write a comment about this issue on the article so everything is clear. and AVALA i did not vadalize nor did i delete sources of any kind. Please do not accuse anybody for something that you have no certainty on. -- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 20:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Blanking sourced material is called vandalism.-- Avala ( talk) 20:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
You did the same, so welcome home :). At this point we should try to find some common ground or we could go on forever.-- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 20:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I think it dosn't look very serious to put the Vatican in the same category as the "de facto independent states" Transnistria, West Sahara and Northern Cyprus. The Vatican is not just another "de facto independe state", but a sovereing state with official diplomatic relations with most sovereign states in the world.-- Camptown ( talk) 19:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
You are Right.-- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 19:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Isn't Vatican City not a member of the UN? Shouldn't it be under a different heading? Perhaps "Other Relevant Entities". PhishRCool Talk / Contribs / Secret Page 23:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
The Vatican City is an independent and a sovereign state since the Lateran Treaty. Why is write that it is a "de facto independent state"?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.209.3 ( talk) 18:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
On the last session of the United Nations Security Council, Croatia declared that it will coordinate recognition of Kosovo with its EU partners. I know that so did Macedonia, but it's different in CRO's case than FYROM's, since they really stated that they'll recognize in time - thus, Croatia should be blue.
Libya should definitely be orange. At the session, its representer was strongly "against Serbia", but in the end Libya couldn't support Kosovo because it stated that it supported the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity. -- PaxEquilibrium ( talk) 22:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
can you give us the sources to prove this please? Ijanderson977 ( talk) 22:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Croatia will most probably recognize but for now their official policy is waiting. And Libya well I have to see the text of their speech. If they did state that then I will put it in orange. -- Avala ( talk) 22:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Text regarding Libya:
“ | GIADALLA A. ETTALHI ( Libya) said he hoped that Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence would not signal a return to the 1990s, when the former Republic of Yugoslavia dissolved in violence. Both parties had reiterated their determination to follow a path of peace and negotiated settlement. He reiterated his call to both parties to refrain from any provocative actions and to remain committed to their pledge to renounce violence. He welcomed the pledge by Kosovo authorities to implement the Ahtisaari plans regarding, among other things, minority rights, to create the conditions for the returns of internally displaced persons and regarding property rights. He called upon Serbia to refrain from any actions that would have a negative impact on the already poor living conditions of the people living in Kosovo.
He said his country would be supportive of the principles of justice and international law that stipulated sovereignty of all States and their territorial integrity. How would the world look like if those principles were forfeited? he asked. It must, however, be recognized that there was an exceptional situation in an exceptional region. His country could not accept that yesterday’s events constituted a precedent that could undermine the territorial integrity of States. The Council must state its respect for the territorial integrity of States and must make clear that the situation could not be used as a precedent. |
” |
Doesn't sound like it's a yes or a no, so they're neutral. — Nightstallion 00:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Unofficial sources state that Croatia will recognize Kosovo on March 15th. JosipMac ( talk) 18:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
This is a pretty reliable information. Croatia Recognize
Translation: title: Croatia formally will recognize Kosova on March 13th
Zagreb, March 4 - The Croatian government formally will recognize Kosova on the thursday meeting on March 13th. It talks about the ambassador to Prishtina will be Zltako Kramariq and this is based from a credited newspaper "Nacional". 128.206.160.6 ( talk) 14:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)Kosova2008
.
I'd like to let all Wikipedia users here know that user Avala has suggested that Bosnia refuses to recognise Kosovo. This is false. It is Republika Srpska which has NOT recognised Bosnia. The internationally recognised government of Bosnia in Sarajevo has not made a formal decision yet. If we followed Avala's logic, one would think the Serbs of Bosnia like to remain in Republika Srpska and not unite with Serbia proper--which is not true. this is just some pushing a Serb based POV on everyone and misrepresenting the facts. Republika Srpska is an independent entity and has its capitol at Banja Luka; it is NOT the Government of Bosnia at Sarajevo. Artene50 ( talk) 23:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I think there is no point in going any further on this matter as even the presiding member has stated the same thing.
Željko Komšić, presiding member of the presidency, has stated that "Bosnia will not recognize Kosovo in the following period and there is a consensus in the Bosnian State Presidency on the issue" [5] -- Avala ( talk) 00:54, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I realy don't understand what the problem is here, two members of the Bosnian tripartite presidency, including the presiding member of the presidency, have stated that Bosnia will not recognize Kosovo. That's clear as day in my book. Bosnia is red. I think that the real problem is that certain Wikipedia editors, that support the independence of Kosovo, are just trying to find reasons not to put more countries on the list that will not support the independence. The thing is most, if not all, of those countries that are in orange (for further talks and against unilateral moves) on the map are actualy anti-independence. The thing is that all of the countries that are accepting Kosovo are doing it in such a way that everybody knows that. They practicly are yelling into loudspeakers to the world they accept Kosovo. The countries that will not accept Kosovo are not doing that, they say eather openly they are against or they are for more talks or against unilateral moves (anti-unilateral moves what do you people think that means). Ministers, ambassadors, prime-ministers and presidents have stated they are against the independence of Kosovo but for some of the Wikipedia editors that is not enough. According to them they should do it the same way that pro-independence countries are doing it. Well that's the thing people they are not telling it so openly but they have hinted that in their statements they are anti-independence. Everybody is twisting the wording of those statements. Both sides. This debate over Bosnia is just like over Armenia. I think people should stop fighting over this so much. I'm telling this to BOTH sides. But mostly to the pro-independence editors here on Wikipedia. As I see it 31 countries so far have stated they have or will recognise Kosovo, another 20 have said openly they are anti-independence but add to that 10 countries that are against unilateral moves and are for more negotiations. That's 31-30. Now you have got 29 other countries that have stated ambigious positions, but you can be sure that at least half of those countries are anti-independence but they can not say that openly, that's why their statements are so ambigious. That's 90 countries in all and they are split right down the middle. 50-50. (reminder there are more than 190 countries in the world) We can all lie to ourselves but the truth is this. And now listen to me I have my stance on the whole situation but I prefer cold logic than to be carried by my emotions. Kosovo will not get a seat in the UN. It will not be a fully recognised country. At beast it will be recognised by the US, 4/5 of the EU, and at least a dozen other countries. But at least 3/4 of the world will not recognise Kosovo or will cowardly take a neutral stance. This situation is exposing the world how it truly is. Those who are pro-Western (pro-US) and those who are pro-Eastern (pro-Russia and pro-China). And the fact is there are more countries that don't like the US. Kosovo will in the end be what Taiwan is. Part and not part of China. Kosovo will be part and it will not be part of Serbia. These are facts people, this is not something that you will find in any references. Because nobody will say this so openly. Now you can start attacking me because of the thing that I have said here but this is the truth and stop kidding yourselves people. Cheers!!!( Top Gun) 02:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
That figures... Avala is an Admin of the Serb Wikipedia. So this means you would like what seems obvious.. Non-Recognition of Kosovo. By The way since you did put BiH on the Non-Recognition list, would you be kind enough to delete the Republika Srpska from other entities. To Top Gun. don't make assumptions please. This is no place for assumptions or personal feelings. This is about the truthful display of information for billions of people reading the WP. The figures that you just gave are a lie.
The Edits The Best way for valid edits is that you first must create the rules for editing a special article or come to a conclusion with the other editors contributing in this theme, and stick to those rules. This can not be a totalitarian regime Avala. Not everything is what you say it is. DO NOT HIDE BEHIND YOUR PHRASE --- VANDALISM. Everything here is sourced, and you most of all has changed information and often made invalid edits, so chill out and try to listen to other people as well. -- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 07:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Who said anything about assumptions. Like I said I don't work on assumptions and I was not relaying on personal feelings. I'll repeat, like I said before everything I said is based on cold logic. If some of you have a problem with that that's your right but do not twist my sentences. Also don't attack Avala so much. He is making his edits and you are making yours. Don't you tell people if they are against the recognition of Kosovo and then tell them they want to make a totalitarian regime here on Wikipedia. You of all people can't speak about personal feelings user GreenClawPrishtina. Your username by itself says who's side your on so don't talk to me about truthful display of information for billions of people. Don't bother posting a reply because I'll not be returning to this discussion again. You can vent your anger if you want. I don't care.( Top Gun) 08:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm happy my friend not angry. My User name does say I'm from Prishtina and that's it. And regarding my edits or my contributions, I think you should read more on this discussion page and you will see that i made no false statements, no accusations of any kind (unless somebody insulted me), and most of all i told the truth in my edits. So Top Gun... Peace man. So to finish this inutile discussion between all the conflicting parties, I just would like to add that no matter what every single edit that is non transparent will always receive Critics and edits till they are crystal clear, without making differences on Recognition or Non-Recognition parts (Pro-R. of Kosova or Anti-R.of Kosova).
So in few words it ain't over till it's over. MAY PEACE AND LIGHT PREVAIL!!!-- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 08:54, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Josip.. you are right. I also stated the same about BiH Recognition, It is pretty obvious that it is a blocked process from the Republika Srpska. The only issue was if we are going to use News Agency Declarations as sources or only Official Government Sources like for example Foreign Affairs Ministry. This thing has gone 2 far. I said yesterday that we need to clearly make a comment on the Article what can be seen as a valid source for the edits. I have nothing against anybody in this place. I was just playing by the rules that were on place 3 or 4 days ago. Nearly the same discussion did go on also about Ukraine and the validity of the sources used. This is what has to be setup and then i don't foresee any problems. If my comments insulted anybody then I'm sorry, but at the same time I will not allow someone to call me a vandal or overreact at something. We can be civil you know. Peace!!! -- GreenClawPrishtina ( talk) 11:54, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I think Bulgaria should be put in the delay/neutral column given their conditions for recognition but also this recent report.-- The Devil's Advocate
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help) Cite error: The named reference "Bosnia2" was defined multiple times with different content (see the
help page).