Talk:United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Law Enforcement WikiProject, a wikiproject dedicated to improving wikipedia's coverage of law enforcement. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
I removed NPOV-warning i added since all contentious issues were resolved with citations. Thanks. --Cat12
Thank you for showing gracious attitude in various ways, incl. not removing NPOV-dispute warning. However Wikipedia is not for propaganda tools neither form both sides of the dispute, so I repeat, I don't take both sides (may I say Serbs and Albanians side?) anyway. Keep up and CONTINUE your good statemenship.
- The fact "Kosovo is part of Serbia and Montenegro" should be in this article not "Kosovo as part of Serbia ONLY" - it would be politically incorrect.
- I don't see how it's politically incorrect, but I agree it's better to be more precise than less precise. Nikola 03:19, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- It's politically incorrect since Serbia is part of Serbia-Montenegro. Therefore Kosovo is part of Serbia within Serbia-Montenegro.--Cat12
- Added the link to document this:"Establishment of substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo is not promoted; rather, all key political factors maintain that full independence of Kosovo as their immediate goal;" http://web.archive.org/web/20020215054649/http://www.rnw.nl/hotspots/html/kosovo011116.html Sorry for the removal of this point : it's true even forthcoming Kosovo Assembly Election most Albanians are aiming for independence, according to Dutch (not-so-reputable western) source.
- So, I understand that we agree, and I have removed the dubious notice. Nikola 03:19, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Sure, though NB : it's from western source (Radio Netherlands) --Cat12
- Your citation about Kosovo refugees are not from reputable source (Serbian-Montenegro source), it would be better if you quote from international organizations. I'm also trying to replace the link i added.
--Cat12
- That source is accepted in a number of articles, is credible and it alone would suffice.
- I have, however, managed to find an UNHCR source at http://www.unhcr.ch/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/home/+hwwBmUe+DapwwwwkwwwwwwwmFqAIRERfIRfgIhFqAIRERfIRfgItFqA5BwBo5Boq5AFqAIRERfIRfgIcFqt5nGxowDzmxwwwwwww/opendoc.pdf. Relevant page is page 9 - "Indicative number of internally displaced persons". Nikola 03:19, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Rewording as "as part of Serbia and Montenegro", "Within the commonwealth of Serbia and Montenegro" too lengthly--Cat12
Re-phrasing this sentence which is mere viewpoint ("generally considered") with no encyclopedic values and no vaild citation to account that phrase: "It is generally considered that, after five years of work (As of 2004), UNMIK failed in most of these tasks:" --Cat
- "It is generally considered that UNMIK failed" may be vague but is certainly more neutral than "UNMIK failed" but I'm OK with either. Nikola 15:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Well I don't agree (IMO) that is vague but rather to imply "generally", which if i'm not wrong you mean "most of the public" are blah blah blah...Which is misleading the audience. Thanks to point out that removing "generally" is still not neutral though, that one without the word "generally" is vague sentence not the other one without that word. --Cat12
Whether is Serb propaganda or not, no comment on all except this:
- Basic civilian administrative functions is performed by local organs which are increasingly getting outside of UNMIK's control;[dubious — see talk page]
If it's underground or shadow administrative institutions that it's not the "local organs" or "local authority delegated by UNMIK". If it's delegated by UNMIK, may the community know which institution delegated by UNMIK is getting out of UNMIK limit? Please point to the reputable sources, not mere viewpoints.--Cat
Remove these sentence, which is not (again...) encyclopedic values but mere viewpoints, with no citations to account these statements.
- Basic civilian administrative functions is performed by local organs which are increasingly getting outside of UNMIK's control;[dubious — see talk page]
- This is of course true but I have no time to find a source so it could go for now. Nikola 15:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Establishment of substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo is not promoted; rather, all key political factors maintain that full independence of Kosovo as their immediate goal;
- A political process to determine Kosovo's future status is not facilitated;
--Cat
If you can quote the source in the External links section to account this statement: "There are 250,000 refugees from Kosovo who still can't return to their homes"--Cat
- OK Nikola 15:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The following seemed to be Serb Propaganda, at least moderate-nationalist serbians viewpoint which is defintely not neutral.
"It is generally considered that, after five years of work (As of 2004), UNMIK failed in most of these tasks"
This is over-generalisation, without proving this statement that "generally considered UNMIK failed".
Basic civilian administrative functions is performed by local organs which are increasingly getting outside of UNMIK's control;
This, again without the vaild prove that kosovars joint administrators (that are delegated by UNMIK) is out of the UNMIK Out-of-Bound marker.
Establishment of substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo is not promoted; rather, all key political factors maintain that full independence of Kosovo as their immediate goal;
While its true that, most opinions views the key political elites are in favour of independence, it is not neutral since after the UNMIK arrived, they had not voice any moves of independence in their public speechs at least. (other than Kosovo crisis, Kosovo war and Milosevic's regime rule, where they did declare their independence). Further more, there is no talks in final status currently. How can we be sure they want independence NOW? or automony NOW? or even a republic in Serbia and Montenegro commonwealth? Unless you prove me wrong by proving from a non-bias realiable source as evidence. PLEASE DON'T ASSUME and jump into conclusion (through assuming).
- Now I have to ask you to cite me when did UNMIK promoted "substantial autonomy and self-government". We can be sure that they want independence NOW because they said it. Nikola 15:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Other than that the rest are true and neutral IMO.
And please, other people are NPOVing all your articles about Kosovo.... Wikipedia is not for your propaganda. It's peoples' encylopedia. FYI (and some boasting ;> ) By the way I'm singaporean so i'm believe as a citizen of neutral country with multi-racial-and-cultural society i think my points are more neutral than yours with some (not all at least) of your Serbian extremist propaganda.
[edit] officially Kosovo and Metohia
Is not true.
[edit] as part of Serbia and Montenegro
Is not true.
[edit] UNMIK
Everybody,who doesn´t accept UNMIK , but is writing for kosovo, is just making propaganda. it has nothing to do with english language. With people like that, i don t need to have a discussion. If you are able to accept UNMIK, than we can have a discussion.
First of all : UNMIK ! What does it mean ? UNMIK stands for United Nation Mission in KOSOVO. In Kosovo ! There are no words for Serbian teritory or things like that. If you would be so nice, to have a look to the homepage from UNMIK, you can see yourself : there are no words for Kosovo in serbian territory . They are just writing " ...in the war-ravaged province of Kosovo... " Than you can read this :
- perform basic civilian administrative functions;
- promote the establishment of substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo;
- facilitate a political process to determine Kosovo's future status;
- coordinate humanitarian and disaster relief of all international agencies;
- support the reconstruction of key infrastructure;
- maintain civil law and order;
- promote human rights; and
- assure the safe and unimpeded return of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes in Kosovo.
That means, Kosovo doesn t have a status( it s war - ravaged ! ). It s just a province, administrated by UNMIK,and nothing else. It doesn t belong to any other state or country. UNMIK is there to help the kosovars to decide for their future.Every other offical reference, like offical serbian - or offical albanian reference, is just propaganda. From that point of knowledge, our discussion is, like I would say Serbia or Albania is a province in China. All articles with the subject " Kosovo ", which have to do with information or references BEFORE the 10. june 1999 belongs to the article " History of Kosovo ". In an other case, I ll delete it , because i took it like propaganda and not like neutral information for Wikipedia. People in this discussion, who don t accept UNMIK, aren t neutral. They are living in an own dreamworld, what has nothing to do with reallity and they are using the Wikipedia for their own propaganda.
If somebody think, that I m wrong, please show me. But please argue with informations from an OFFICIAL document, accepted from UNMIK and not with an dokument from national offical propaganda informations. We can have a disskussion with facts from UNMIK, not with the past. Wikipedia stands for knowledge and shouldn t have to become a place for national propaganda, no matter if it s serbian or albanian propaganda. In other case serbian and albanian people will ravage it, like they ve ravaged Kosovo.--Hipi Zhdripi 20:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
It was so long time, no body has profet the I am wrong.--Hipi Zhdripi 22:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
