Maybe somebody should refresh Sport and write that Serbia national water polo team became World Champion once again this year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.148.115.21 ( talk) 22:40, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
In fact he was shoot by a member of the secret police jovanovic zvezdan, as a part of a coup d'etat.It doesn't have to do anything with ultranationalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.86.44.78 ( talk) 19:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
In the Kosovo article, that country borders with Central Serbia, and in this article, Serbia does not border with Kosovo.
I think this is a POV way of describing reality, and that there are NPOV ways of describing *today's* international border. -- Mareklug talk 03:05, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
I made an earlier edit changing the wording to state that whether Albania borders Serbia or not is a matter of controversy, specifically that of Kosovo's status. It was edited back to list Albania as uncontroversially bordering Serbia, with a reference to a UN resolution of 1999. I hope anyone will agree that the situation has changed significantly since 1999, with a large number of UN member states recognizing Kosovo as an independent state, while others still consider it part of Serbia. It's therefore POV to list Albania among the neighbors of Serbia without stating that this is a matter of controversy. I've changed the wording again. Please discuss here before changing it back. Kenji Yamada ( talk) 09:00, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
It looks like we're getting into an edit war over the sentence including Albania among Serbia's neighbors. Can we at least agree that whether Albania is a neighbor of Serbia or not depends on whether Kosovo is part of Serbia, and this latter point is controversial? Any statement to the effect that Albania and Serbia share a border, period, is POV, unless it makes it clear that this is a matter of controversy. The facts of the matter are 1) Albania borders Kosovo, 2) Kosovo was until fairly recently regarded as part of Serbia by nearly all other countries, and 3) Kosovo is now regarded as part of Serbia by a large number of countries, but is regarded by an also large number of countries as a sovereign state and therefore no longer part of Serbia. If we say, in whatever grammatical form, "Albania borders Serbia", then we are committing to the point of view of the governments of Serbia, Russia, Spain, Ukraine, Vietnam etc. in preference to that of the USA, UK, Canada, France, Germany, Saudi Arabia etc. Kenji Yamada ( talk) 09:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Kosovo is not under the administration of EULEX. EULEX provides only technical assistance to the local police, justice and customs services. Direct international influence in Kosovo internal politics is applied through the office of the International Civilian Representative/EUSR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Icarusburns ( talk • contribs) 08:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps article could mention the great Serbian Inventor(Born in Croatia of Serbian Parents july 10,1856 died Jan 7 1943 New York City N.Y. USA>) Theres the Tesla museum(also not mentioned in article located in Belgrade , with Teslas ashs and variuos models of his iknventions.Thanks! PMSN080909.Thanks! JANUSROMA ( talk) 20:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Tesla was a Serb and a very important person in the history of the world. He should be mentioned. It doesn't make sense for Tesla not to be mentioned. Gingermint ( talk) 03:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Very weak english writing at work here. Has any native English speaker read the entire article? Realize how many mistakes there are? I wanted to edit out the mistakes, but realized I am barred from doing so. Please, someone take 10 mins and clean it up. Looks completely unprofessional and unkempt.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avatar47 ( talk • contribs) 10:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Milosovic was being tried by the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia, not the International Criminal Court. Both are located in the Hague but obviously different entities. I am new to this so could not make the correction. ( Dutchwolves ( talk) 13:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC))
I don't believe he was ever sentenced. Prodego talk 04:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
"Albania, to the southwest, borders Kosovo, Serbia's southern province, which has declared its independence"
Is this supposed to be neutral?
First of all, Kosovo is not Serbia's province, it's a territory claimed by two opposing sides. The only international legally binding document that talks about Kosovo is UNSCR1244, which claims Kosovo as a province of FRY, of which Serbia is the legal successor. To this day, this document is in effect and the majority of the world has not showed any disregard for it. On the other hand, some countries, REALLY influential ones, decided to support Kosovo's bid for independence, and after the Kosovo government declared it (even though that same government... doesn't really govern Kosovo - the UN does, with EULEX taking most of the work off their back) they recognized it. Thus, Kosovo can no longer be called "Serbia's southern province".
Second of all, this isn't an article about Albania! You can't start a sentence with "Albania borders...", it's just absurd. Serbia borders Albania through the disputed territory of Kosovo *footnote* but not according to those who consider Kosovo a separate country. If you'd like it the other way around, you'd really like to confuse the unsuspecting reader, claiming that Serbia borders Kosovo, but also claims that Kosovo is Serbia, therefore it really borders Albania. Sincerely though, either way you'll get a lot of people angry, so take this into consideration - this is an article about Serbia, the UN officially sees the borders of Serbia touching Albania and the majority of world states agree. Makes more sense to say it borders Serbia, emphasize that it's through Kosovo, but say that it's disputed. Nice, clean, clear. I know, the Albanians won't like this. Well, facts are facts, the phrasing is a matter of personal viewpoints - I'd go with "simple" rather than "pro-Albanian" for no reason.. other than it being "pro-Albanian" or "pro-US". -- Cinéma C 06:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Serbia has no border with Albania. After the Milosevic plan for Greater Serbia when his Serb militias invaded Kosova and annexed it, he was eventually kicked out by the UN and Nato. After that, Kosova was a UN-zone within Serbia & Montenegro, another country, and before the UN left, Kosova declared it's independence. Kosovoa is also recognized by a large number of world states, and all democratic. I can't help it if non-democratic dictatiorships are opposed to Kosova being free of fascist Serbs. Human Rights Believer ( talk) 11:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
The Yugoslav army was basically a Serb army by 1999, if not by 1993. Hope this Helps. 137.205.73.61 ( talk)
{{editsemiprotected}}
Please include under invasion of Yugoslavia also the following as this article should also confront Serbia's antisemitism during WWII:
== Serbian antisemitism, and Serbian massacres of Jews ==
The Belgrade government issued the only post-stamp in Europe 1939 saying that "Belgrade is the first Jewish free city in Europe". Anti-Jew-laws were passed before the German invasion during WWII. Prince Paul was pro-Axis and the reason why Germany invaded Yugoslavia was the war with Russia and the fact that Serbia was Russia's ally. At least 70.000 Jews were killed in Serbia with the cooperation of the Serbian people.Source: Yad Vashem Memorial Jerusalem.-- SerbsforPeace ( talk) 13:13, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Not done: Welcome and thanks for wanting to contribute. Wikipedia is not a forum to "confront" issues. If these are significant historical events, find a scholarly article to cite and scale the mention of the events to something that satisfies wp:weight. Celestra ( talk) 17:08, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}}
Please include under invasion of Yugoslavia also the following as this article should also describe Serbia's antisemitism during WWII because the anti-jew laws passed in Belgrade and the thousand of Jews killed in Serbia constitute an important part of it's history:
== Serbian antisemitism, and Serbian massacres of Jews ==
The Belgrade government issued the only post-stamp in Europe 1939 saying that "Belgrade is the first Jewish free city in Europe". Anti-Jew-laws were passed before the German invasion during WWII. Prince Paul was pro-Axis and the reason why Germany invaded Yugoslavia was the war with Russia and the fact that Serbia was Russia's ally. At least 70.000 Jews were killed in Serbia with the cooperation of the Serbian people. Source1: http://www.goethe.de/prs/mif/m09/jun/de4635587.htm Source2: http://www.open.ac.uk/socialsciences/semlin/en/holocaust-in-serbia.php Source3: Yad Vashem Memorial Jerusalem.-- SerbsforPeace ( talk) 13:13, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
500000 Roma most of them expel from Kosova the biggest untruth - Kosovo never had more than 50000 Roma, Ashkalia, Egiptian etc. and now there are 30000 of them in Kosovo. Serbia has more than million Roma etc in reality.
National Park of Shar mountain was and it is in territory of Independent state of Kosova Environment section is patchy, and contains some outdated information. NATO bombing did make impact at the time, but it was 10 years ago. I found a comprehensive new study at:
as well as
http://www.balwois.com/cms/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=81&Itemid=166
but I'm short on time right now. No such user ( talk) 09:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I see there is no mention of Serbian war crimes but plenty about Ustase. This does not seem NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.205.73.61 ( talk) 15:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
How funny and curious that the author "accidentally" skipped this part of Serbian history like it never happened or it is irrelevant. But he was very outspoken talking about Jasenovac and blaming it all on Croatians forgetting about the Nazi's.
Oh well, i'm not here to ruin your glorious version of Serbian history neither i will even bother to dispute it, together with those Jasenovac figures, but if you're writing something at least write the whole story.
p.s. looking forward for a day that Vukovar or Srebrenica people (at least those two for start) will receive an apology from the serbian goverment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjerod (grjytl dn talk • contribs) 03:50, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, it is ridiculous to have a whole separate section on the Ustase genocide and yet not a single mention of Serbian war crimes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.205.73.61 ( talk) 17:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
To the gentlemen writing above, the Ustase committed their crimes without seeking any permission from their Nazi 'masters'. In fact, Alexander Löhr, the a Luftwaffe General even wrote protests to his government about the activities at Jasenovac. The Germans even court-martialed 2 Croatians for horrible crimes against humanity in 1942. The crimes in Jasenovac happened before the height of the Final Solution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avatar47 ( talk • contribs) 10:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
The World Court has found no evidence directly linking Serbia and the 1992-1995 war in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled on February 26 2007 that there was no proof that Serbia or its leaders planned to wipe out the non-Serbian peoples of the Balkans, or that a chain of command existed linking them to the atrocities committed in Bosnia. There is no doubt that Milosevic bore substantial responsibility for the political developments that facilitated the break-up of Yugoslavia. However, the ICJ ruling flies in the face of the claim of Western governments and the media that the Serbian President was the all-powerful figure who “directed what went on in the Balkans” or single-handedly “destroyed the delicate balance of ... Yugoslavia.” "The significance of the World Court ruling on genocide in Bosnia" By Paul Mitchell, 16 March 2007 -- Cinéma C 22:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Then remove the Ustase section. After all, Wikipedia is apolitical (lol). 137.205.73.61 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC).
You should NOT remove it! Ustase did a big crime against Serbs and had one of the largest camps during WW2 in Europe!
I am against it! Never remove it. This is history and a sad fact. You should thought of that genocide before you have done it, back to WW2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.86.177.107 ( talk) 03:51, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
^^^^ I agree 137.205.73.61 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:59, 11 October 2009 (UTC).
Don't remove it. No doubt about that genocide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.146.5 ( talk) 15:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Cinema C i don't know where are you getting those kind of articles, i'm refering to the world court thing that has found no evidence directly linking Serbia in the war in Bosnia, lol, even if such article and statement really exists than the world court is a big joke of an institution, seriously, don't want to be rude or anything but that is just absurd and even offensive for the bosnian people who lived thru it. Maybe that same court says that there is no evidence that Serbia invaded/destroyed Croatia? What about Kosovo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjerod ( talk • contribs) 18:08, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Cool,if wikipedia is apolitical,why not simply state the facts and list the genocides Serbia did? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.100.48.166 ( talk) 17:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
To the autor of the section. This is Wikipedia. It is apolitical. The name of the article is Serbia. The section is not mentioning or referring to Serbia. This is a paradox. I suggest to remove the section to some other existing article or to open a new article about the topic. It is like that in the article Italy there is a section about economic activity of Italian emigrants in Chile - doesn't really make sense. My suggestion is to have this in the article Serbs. Croatian or Bosnian territory is not Serbia. Hammer of Habsburg ( talk) 22:33, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
It is not true that Serbia is the first nation in the relative number of internet users in the Balkans. According to the same source, Greece, Croatia, Slovenia and Italy have higher relative number of users. Look at the Balkan peninsula, it includes ALL the countries from Italy to Greece. The formulation of the sentence should be changed. Hammer of Habsburg ( talk) 21:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
The table provided in the article about population census is not the same as the one in the article demographics of Serbia. The numbers are more or less OK but the list of different nationalities is not consistent. For example, according to the article DoS, there are more Montenegrins, Yugoslavs, Macedonians and Croats than Albanians or Germans, but they are not listed in the table of this article. On the other side, The figure for Slovaks is saying 1,08% here and in the article Dem.of S there is 0,79. Is there any reason why or is it all a mistake? Hammer of Habsburg ( talk) 22:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
The history section of the article is very long and almost entirely focused on wars. Furthermore the history section is cluttered with so many images that it is difficult to read with so many images jutting into the article, these need to be reduced to essential ones. The history info on wars needs to be condensed to allow other history to be included, such as the history of the culture, economy, politics, and very important historical figures from Serbia.-- R-41 ( talk) 19:24, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
There's missed music section mentioning Serbian national dance like kolo and oro, then Serbian instruments like gusle as well as big success winning Eurovsion 2007. in national language song after 1998. for the first time as well as the fact that in 2004. Serbia was the only country singing in Serbian while all the rest were in English and took the 2nd position. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.86.223.222 ( talk) 12:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Someone had placed merge tab on Republic of Serbia (federal) to merge here, but didn't put the tab on this page. so just put tag and also just informing to see this page to talk about it Gman124 talk 03:45, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps mention of the Tesla museum Photos of musuem.Mention of great Serbian American inventor Nikola tesla(1856-1943) in the article? BOMBAYBOY ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:35, 12 March 2010 (UTC).
Com on, what are you talking about? Tesla spent the most of his life in Lika (traditionally Serbian populated Gospic) in Austro-Hungary... Croatia didn't exist! By Tesla will all of his stuffs were moved to Serbia. So respect him as a Serb and nothing else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.86.223.222 ( talk) 12:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Bunjevci (and Šokci people for that matter) are Croats. Yes they are a "sub-group", but they are still Croats first. Showing them as separate ethnic group on maps in just trying to diminish the Croatian presence in Serbia. In fact, having the different options on a census is misleading as some will pick one or the other based on fear of discrimination. 207.236.177.82 ( talk) 00:46, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
This is rasism up... Those people are not Croats. Some of them also feel like Serbs of Rman catholic religion and majority as separate ethnic group. This is the proof Serbia is democratic and allow everyone to be what he, she, it wants to be... Bosniac, Bosniac, Muslim, Muslim, Montenegrin, Montenegrin.... no matter they are Serbs by origin. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.86.223.222 (
talk)
12:20, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
The most famous Serbs's were Nikola Tesla he was the first scientist who knew how to use and create scientist and used it's power to light a light bolt, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.92.193.103 ( talk) 14:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Could everyone here stop with this anonymous user crap. Sign in with real accounts if you want any controversial arguments of yours to be taken seriously. Anonymous users who make controversial claims are typically users who have been banned from Wikipedia. I suspect that some of the anonymous users here are such banned users, given there very aggressive accusations they are making. To make claims from an anonymous account after being banned is deceitful, manipulative, cowardly, and pathetic. Create a new account, stop the aggressive behaviour, be cooperative, and bring references to back up your points.-- R-41 ( talk) 04:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
To all users engaged in arguments here, do not use this discussion page for a soapbox for your personal opinions and rumours, read Wikipedia:NOTSOAPBOX#SOAPBOX, Wikipedia bans soapboxes. Wikipedia is not some blog about the rumours, opinions, beliefs of users, it is an encyclopedia that is to use reliable references.-- R-41 ( talk) 20:52, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Done. User warned for vandalism. Thanks for bringing this issue to our attention.
Jarkeld (
talk)
19:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}}
change that sentence in albanian at the beginning with 'serbia', as it should be.
guess this kind of trolling is amusing to some people..
thanks!
91.148.92.94 ( talk) 19:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC) serbia is in england —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.100.28.95 ( talk) 08:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
The Template-note is intended as an NPOV status description for inclusion in all Kosovo-related articles. It describes the level of international recognition/non-recongition of Kosovo-statehood internationally. At the moment, the Template-note includes the opinion of those states that are not UN-members but do recognise Kosovo. However, the Template-note does not include the opinion of those states that are not UN-members but do not recognise Kosovo. Some users (including me) think this is biased and want a change. Please contribute your views and participate in the vote. 84.203.72.8 ( talk) 22:11, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I have a suggestion regarding the Serbian history page, witch is about recent Serbian history,
specifically about the latest Serbian independence, after the dissolution of Socialist Federative Republic of Yougoslavia. From the legal point of view Serbia became an independent state on April 27, 1992 when Serbia and Montenegro joined in passing the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. After that the state of Serbia and Montenegro, witch was formed in 2003 became the legal successor of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and later after the Montenegro's successful
referendum for independence, Serbia became the legal successor of the state of Serbia and Montenegro.
So I think that Serbia clearly became independent on April 27, 1992, not on june 5, 2006 as it states here. On june 5, 2006 Serbia just changed it's name, from Serbia and Montenegro to Serbia. The following link should be helpful http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5388.htm#people. Mferando ( talk) 18:39, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
I have a suggestion regarding the Serbian history page, witch is about recent Serbian history,
specifically about the latest Serbian independence, after the dissolution of Socialist Federative Republic of Yougoslavia. From the legal point of view Serbia became an independent state on April 27, 1992 when Serbia and Montenegro joined in passing the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. After that the state of Serbia and Montenegro, witch was formed in 2003 became the legal successor of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and later after the Montenegro's successful
referendum for independence, Serbia became the legal successor of the state of Serbia and Montenegro.
So I think that Serbia clearly became independent on April 27, 1992, not on june 5, 2006 as it states here. On june 5, 2006 Serbia just changed it's name, from Serbia and Montenegro to Serbia. The following link should be helpful http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5388.htm#people. Mferando ( talk) 18:39, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Mbabuskov ( talk) 13:14, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
In the articles Oralno doba and Marko Živić Show, authored Serbian media sources are being used for citations. For Oralno doba:
For Marko Živić Show:
While yes, the limitations of Google Translate are to be acknowledged, the content of the citations and the wide use of them in Serbia suggests to me that they are suitable, however I request that a determination be made as to whether or not the Serbian language sources Press Magazin, Blic, Kurir, and Politik might be considered reliable enough for citing these articles on Serbian television shows, as English language sources are unavailable. Thank you, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:22, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Serbia editors...I am not really pro Serb or anti Kosovo etc..but because I built up a consensus for change at Template: Kosovo-note, a group of editors are about to ban me...See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard and scroll down to the Kosovo template section....I guess I annoyed some editors because I was persistent in seeking a conensus....so now I will be punished by being banned. They will pretend that I am a "sock" etc. Thanks if you can help. 84.203.69.86 ( talk) 21:35, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Serbian constitution maintains that it has sovereignty over Kosovo. Since the ethnic Albanians would make up a significant minority for the country, the name of Serbia should be included in the Albanian language as well. Actually enough precedent has been set on these issues but I wanted to know everyone's thoughts. So, what are your thoughts on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.26.239 ( talk) 09:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
why isn't the Kosovo independence declaration in the history section, even if Serbia doesn't recognize and even if it were to return as an integral part of Serbia this is still a part of it's history, if should at least have a paragraph -- C D 14:30, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
There should be a lot more photos of Serbian influental politicians, such as Nikola Pasic or King Aleksandar I Karadjordjevic, rather than war bombing pictures. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
94.189.217.206 (
talk)
20:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Please add these photos(or some of them):
-- 94.140.88.117 ( talk) 19:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
You should have mentioned some Serbian painters (Uros Predic, Paja Jovanovic, Konstantin Danil, Djura Jaksic etc.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.217.206 ( talk) 20:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
The basic name, Serboi, originates in the works of Tacitus, Plinius and Ptolemy in the 1st and 2nd centuries, describing a people living north of the Caucasus. Following the migration into Central Europe, Serbs established a state called Sorbia (Belasrbia - White Serbia) in the 5th century. The term White Serbia (White Rus/White Ruthenia, Belarus) is connected with Iranic word-side system because of their Sarmatian heritage, as Sarmatians were indo-European proto-Iranic branch of people who used colors as world sides: white designated the west, red the south, green the east, and black the north. Part of Sarmatian and Scythian tribes settled at present day Ukraine/Russia around river Tanais (river Don). The historian Ptolemy identifies the Serboi as a tribe who lived north of the Caucasus, and other sources identify the Serboi as an Alan tribe in the Volga-Don steppe in the 3rd century. Some historians argue that the arrival of the Huns on the European steppe forced a portion of Alans previously living there to move northwest into the land of Venedes, possibly merging with Western Balts there to become the precursors of historic Slav nations. Their arrival in the Balkans is thought to have happened in the sixth century A.D., when Serbs settled among the other Slavic tribes that settled there a century earlier and mixed with them forming a medieval Serbian nation. Some of the White Serbs did not leave and their descendants are known as Sorbs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Studiesad ( talk • contribs) 01:00, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, folks, but this [4] latest series of edits was the drop that spilled the cup. The article was 140 kB and growing, and it started losing respect for the reader and importance of certain stuff. Now we have a section on cuisine, rock music, waterpolo each, with every single item accompanied by picture, some of which include ducks, 10-odd city panoramas, 10-odd forests, 8 meals and so on. Enough is enough, really, and now a lot of the article simply distracts the reader's attention with a too big level of detail. I did re-read it and it is painful to follow at times. For about an optimal article in this regard, see Austria.
I do respect the work of others, but please see Wikipedia:Summary style. There are articles for such details, but it has no place in the main Serbia page. I have a certain impression that those articles are under-cited and under-developed, and that this article gets all the edits.
I do plan to address those issues, and clean up the article, moving the contents to sub-articles, as my time permits. But please try to put yourself into a reader's perspective, and put the right level of detail. No such user ( talk) 07:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
In the Culture/Science section, "phycisist" should be "physicist"
Excitator ( talk) 08:38, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Sorry but I see not the ((Kosovoref)) template in usage, and the mountains of Sar are not listed as being in kosovo. I would suggest that you clearly mark the disputed areas clearly. I have added this to the wikiproject Kosovo for watching. Please use the same standard of marking that you use on the Kosovo articles. thanks, mike James Michael DuPont ( talk) 07:41, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Serbia won Davis Cup in Dec,2010 for the first time. The same needs to be added in Sports section. 203.99.217.10 ( talk) 06:25, 7 December 2010 (UTC)Ritu Bhatia 12/07/2010
Currently in the lead is written that "its border with Albania is disputed. (hidden note to see this archived discussion)"
I understand that the issue is not easy, but the current variant is misleading and maybe wrong. It is wrong, because I think that the SFRY-Albania border is properly demarcated, etc. in the pre-1990 times and there are no border disputes there (don't have a source at hand, so it would be good if someone has source showing that - or alternatively showing that there was some dispute over the SFRY-Albania border. Are there any current border disputes between Albania and RoK? If there are then we can assume that they are "continuation" of previous dispute between Albania and SFRY/Serbia).
So, if Kosovo is part of Serbia - then the border with Albania is not disputed - and if Kosovo is an independent state - then there is no border of Serbia with Albania.
I propose: "Serbia borders Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia to the west; Hungary to the north; Romania and Bulgaria to the east; to the south 'Kosovo, whose status is disputed'[insert your preferred wikilink here] borders Macedonia, Albania and Montenegro. (additional "and Central Serbia borders only Macedonia and Montenegro" may be added in the 'south section' if someone finds this useful) - or -
"Serbia borders Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia to the west; Hungary to the north; Romania and Bulgaria to the east; Macedonia and Montenegro to the south and additionally Albania - trough 'Kosovo, whose status is disputed'[insert your preferred wikilink here]." Alinor ( talk) 08:14, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Srbija je najbolja a ako to Englezi nemisle onda su... —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
109.93.84.16 (
talk)
08:44, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Under the "Science" section, the following sentence makes no sense, at least to someone who doesn't already know the topic at hand (i.e., me): "Serbian academics founded “zero spot”, and because of that all androids of the world are able to walk." Delmonte ( talk) 06:31, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}}
213.198.253.102 (
talk)
21:44, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}}
213.198.253.102 (
talk)
21:52, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
- This article seems to be biased somehow and doesn’t talk of issues that might be disadvantageous to Serbs.
- The article doesn’t speak correctly of Voivodina and its short status as a Serbian province in Austria-Hungary. (See main article Voivodina.)
- The article doesn’t mention a major territory issue: after World War I in 1920, the region of Voivodina was detached from Hungary and was granted by the victorious allied powers to the Kingdom of Serbia in the Treaty of Trianon, and in 1945 it became part of Yugoslavia.
- The article should refer in more details to Serbia’s role in the Yugoslav wars. Again, it seems to be biased and it doesn’t mention facts and issues that might be disadvantageous to Serbs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.168.71.114 ( talk) 16:06, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree, there is barely any reference on the kosovo war and serbian involvment in that. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
194.7.62.30 (
talk)
09:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Can someone put the national anthem of Serbia on the main page of the country please! this is the file: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.30.168.23 ( talk) 22:09, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Please can you update to the new coat of arms. I see flag is updated, but coat of arms isnt.
Bets regards,
Mihajlo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.194.215 ( talk) 18:16, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
No such user changed a clause in the opening paragraph from
its border with Albania is disputed
to
additionally, it borders Albania through Kosovo, whose status is disputed
He explained his edit in Talk:Serbia/Archive_6#border_with_Albania_disputed.3F.21. However, this wording fails to address one of the concerns (specifically, my own) discussed earlier in Talk:Serbia/Archive_6#Albania_borders_Kosovo, a discussion in which three editors came to a consensus that addressed multiple concerns about wording. I'm changing it back, pending a proposal for alternate wording that satisfies the following criteria: a) The clause should be succinct; b) Serbia should be the subject of the clause; c) The clause should not state unequivocally that Serbia borders Albania, as this is or is not the case depending on the status of Kosovo, a matter of dispute; d) The clause should not imply that Serbia is alone and unsupported in claiming Kosovo as part of Serbia, since UN Security Council Resolution 1244 supports this claim. Kenji Yamada ( talk) 18:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
actually, Serbia borders Kosovo, it has multiple border-crossing points and a borderline guarded by KFOR, can't ignore that. It doesn't really border Ablania since it's government has no control over this border, this border is only theoretical, you would need extra sources even to prove that it is disputed, otherwise it is WP:SYNTH, I haven't personally heard of the Kosovo border with Albania being disputed, even if this is implied we can't state it unless a reliable source is quoted ( WP:SYNTH) -- Cradel ( talk) 00:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Please do not change the facts about establishment of the first state,kingdom,empire,etc. as they are all correct,and can be checked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rekonstruh ( talk • contribs) 22:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
| established_event1 = Principality of Serbia (medieval) 8th Century | established_event2 = Independence from Ottoman Empire 1804 | established_event3 = Kingdom of Yugoslavia 1918 | established_event4 = Independent republic 200
Some people consider that the article is too long. I suggest that the "History section" should be rewritten. Perhaps, the same way the French did it (see France). Pictures should remain the way they are, because they seem to be pretty good. And, "Music" should be shorter.
In fact, articles on many other countries(like for example: US, UK, Argentina, France, Mexico) are even longer.
Also, coat of arms should be changed, because the flag is. And anthem should be in english - "God of justice", and we should also put the media file.
mm.srb — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Mm.srb (
talk •
contribs)
13:34, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Serbia has 7.498.001 citizens excluding Kosovo and Metohija according to the last census from 2002 : http://www.srbija.gov.rs/pages/article.php?id=6 Can someone make a correction ?
Pedja770 ( talk) 21:36, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Someone please put more nature images of Serbia because it has a beautiful nature so find some interesting pictures and about Sport section please put at least 2 more pictures of football team or basketball team please!
I agree that there must be much more pictures of Serbia's landscapes, mountains (Zlatibor, Kopaonik, Stara planina...),popular destinations (such as Vrnjacka Banja), monasteries, buildings, wheat fields in Vojvodina, rivers (Danube, Morava, Drina, Lim). I live in Serbia and reading this article makes me think I am living in a country in which is the most important thing its history.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.216.210.26 ( talk) 12:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Should the GDP be updated with the 2011 estimate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.1.217 ( talk) 21:55, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Our country motto Only Unity Saves the Serbs / Samo Sloga Srbina Spašava should be stated on the page. There should also be the english translation of the anthem God of Justice —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.93.123.82 ( talk) 01:03, 11 January 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.131.82.80 ( talk) 22:29, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I spotted some stuff here: Holocaust/genocide over the Serbs in NDH As a Jew well-versed on these matters I would like to make a clarification on this matter. The Holocaust is specifically the mass murder by Nazi Germany of various peoples deemed undesirable. It is not exclusively the slaughter of 1/3 of the Jewish population. The Jewish portion of the Holocaust is commonly referred to as "HaShoah" or the Calamity in Hebrew. Please do not confuse the two. Thanks! =) TheArchaeologist Say Herro 04:09, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Serbia has 7.498.001 citizens excluding Kosovo and Metohija according to the last census from 2002: http://www.srbija.gov.rs/pages/article.php?id=6 Someone please put that! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.121.90.52 ( talk) 12:01, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Kosovo and Metohija is part of Serbia. Alek serb ( talk) 03:48, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
18:02, 15 May 2011 (UTC)18:02, 15 May 2011 (UTC)18:02, 15 May 2011 (UTC)~~`. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.121.15.138 ( talk) 17:59, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I've made a change to the formation events and dates adding two more important events and dates,do not change or reedit them,as they are completely correct!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rekonstruh ( talk • contribs) 09:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
In small sumary in right corner of the page statistics should include Kosovo. According to UN Serbia contains Kosovo and there is not such an state in UN. Thus, similarly as it is done with Georgia, statistcs should reflect hole country. Additiona information can be provided for Kosovo, Vojvodina as autonomus regions. There should be one rule for all.
-- 109.245.23.89 ( talk) 10:14, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Brioni summit.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011
| |
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (
commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 06:10, 9 June 2011 (UTC) |
{{
edit semi-protected}}
Republic of Djokovic
116.214.31.129 ( talk) 12:11, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
I propose that the current wording "additionally, it borders Albania through Kosovo, whose status as part of Serbia is disputed" be changed to "The location of Serbia's southwestern border is a matter of dispute. Serbia asserts its claim on the region of Kosovo and thus considers itself to border upon Albania. The competing claim that the Republic of Kosovo is an independent state would interpose that country between Serbia and Albania." I realize that this is longer, but feel that it presents the information more clearly and in a more neutral fashion. -- Khajidha ( talk) 12:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
I would like to move the above article from Kumanovo Treaty to Kumanovo Agreement. This is because while the "International Security Force" is not an international organisation or capable of signing treaties etc. It's never been registere with the UN either (for that reason). Any way, I wanted to move it but got this message:
Source and destination titles are the same; can't move a page over itself. Please check that you didn't enter the destination title into the "reason" field instead of the "new title" field.
If there is an interested editor or two who could help me out on the technical aspects to moving the page that would be great. Thanks. NelsonSudan ( talk) 16:02, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
... add more information and hopefully validate the history written "...Following World War I, Serbia formed Yugoslavia with other South Slavic peoples which existed in several forms up until 2006, when Serbia regained its independence..."
The written preview article is condensed, but should not inaccurately define national events, by eliminating Yugoslavian origins and international as well as socio-political constructs that happened after the Yugoslav monarchy came to an end. Perhaps a better statement could be, "...Serbia contributed in part to the creation of the "second Yugoslavia", following the events that took place after World War II..." without exhibiting pro-Serbian bias. Please refer to Wikipedia historical reference Josip Broz Tito.
Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.72.127.4 ( talk) 04:46, 3 October 2011 (UTC)