Talk:Sarajevo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Sarajevo is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 11, 2004.
Article Milestones Date Process Result August 3, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 23, 2004 Peer review Reviewed November 1, 2004 Featured article candidate Promoted July 31, 2006 Featured article review Kept Current Status: Featured article

	This article is supported by WikiProject Cities, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Cities on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former Yugoslavia, a WikiProject related to the nations of the Former Yugoslavia, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, Republic of Macedonia, Serbia, and Slovenia.

This page has been selected for Version 0.5 and the release version of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale. It is in the category Geography.

Contents 1 Old short article 2 Sarajevo To Do List 3 NPOV notice for "aggression" 4 map 5 numbers 6 FA excerpt 7 Urban stereotypes 8 Main picture? 9 Football 10 The alleged ethnic cleansing 10.1 "Alleged" ? 11 Specific government dates 12 Pigeon Square 13 Photos 14 Fact Check? 15 sarajevo my home 16 religion (4.1) 17 Some questions/suggestions 18 Image:Sarajevotramway.JPG 19 Sound 20 On population 21 Wrong comment 22 Incorrect information added to the first few sections 23 Missing photo?

[edit] Old short article

This page could use a good going over. Too much history, and not enough about contemporary life User:Alcarillo 19:53 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

What the heck? This is an encyclopedia article, and you want to trim the history? Contemporary life needs some mention of course, but there's a likelihood of POV with that. However, the history is vital. Ambivalenthysteria 05:22, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I meant that the balace was too much on history. For example, there is nothing about the city architecture (both historical and modern), postwar developments, tourism, culture or economics. I think that's far more important than the historical sketch which takes up half the article. Of course, there are going to be POV issues with just about anything written about this place, which is why the good folks here will probably keep an eagle eye on it. But as the article stands now, it's of little value, and certainly doesn't do this remarkable city justice. Look at Zagreb and you'll see what I mean. User:Alcarillo 15:55, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC) edt bla blah bla

As the person responsible for the present layout of Sarajevo article - I fully agree with Alcarillo. I however don't have the time or knowledge to do that. Article on architecture IMO needs to be scientific and substantiated and personally I'm not into architecture, I'm a computers guy myself ;) There needs to be a section on culture and cultural events (Sarajevo Film Festival, Sarajevo Winter, Jazz Festival etc.) but it also needs some thought and time.

Vedran 08:31, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

I read your discussion and agreed. I then spent two weeks working on an article for Sarajevo, and the June 24th version of this page is what I've come up with. Sarajevo is my hometown and, in my opinion, the greatest city in the world. I hope this page sattisfies those who wanted a better article for Sarajevo. My goal was to make it better than the page for New York City. It should also be noted that I wrote the articles for the two suburbs, four municipalities, and the history of Sarajevo main article. I thank Vedran and past contributors for establishing the core of the current article.

Asim Led 22:27, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Sarajevo To Do List

Status: Introduction and geography are done. Now to do history. I should finish it up fairly quickly, but I have in mind splitting it into a series of "History of Sarajevo" articles. I'll probably do that. But first just the basics of history, which should be done fairly quickly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asim Led (talk • contribs) 09:07, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC).

• Introduction
  • Add City Flag
  • Add City Seal
  • Check/Create Links
    • Capital
    • Bosnia and Herzegovina
    • Balkans
    • 1991
    • Census
    • Ottomans
    • 1461
    • 1914
    • Archduke Franz Ferdinand
    • Austria-Hungary
    • Black Hand
    • Extremist
    • World War I
    • 1984 Winter Olympics
    • 1992
    • 1995
    • Siege of Sarajevo
    • Yugoslav Wars
    • Canton Sarajevo
    • Cantons of Bosnia
    • Gazi Husrev-Beg Mosque
    • Cathedral of Jesus' Heart
    • Sarajevo Film Festival
    • Bascarsija Nights
    • Sarajevo Winter Festival
    • Sarajevo Jazz Festival
  • Placement and Lay-out
  • Final template check

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asim Led (talk • contribs) 11:53, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC).

• Geography and Climate
  • Update text
  • Check/Create Links
    • Bosna river
    • Miljacka
    • Vrelo Bosne
    • Ilidza
    • Bjelasnica
    • Igman
    • Jahorina
    • Trebevic
    • Treskavica
    • Butmir
  • Find picture
  • Nitpicking and minor edits

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asim Led (talk • contribs) 04:55, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC).

• History
  • Update text
  • Check/Create Links
    • Butmir Culture
    • Isa-beg Ishakovic
    • Gazi Husrev-beg
    • Travnik
    • History of Sarajevo
  • Nitpicking and minor edits

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asim Led (talk • contribs) 07:31, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC).

[edit] NPOV notice for "aggression"

Nikola Smolenski wrote: NPOV notice; Bosnian Serbs are referretd to as "agressors"; that is Bosnian government propaganda and not neutral.

Well, that is indeed the opinion of the Bosnian government, but if a three year siege is not a sign of aggression, I don't know what is. I can barely find a definition of the term in the dictionaries that doesn't perfectly fit in this case. --Joy [shallot] 23:33, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It is the official position of the Bosnian government, as well as numerous international politicians. Bosnian Serb forces set up a blockade of Sarajevo prior to any actual provocation, fired the first military shots, and knowingly deprived the city of essential things such as water, shipments of food, electricity, heating, and medicine. If you somehow believe the siege of sarajevo was not an agression, please explain on this page before positng a npov notice on an otherwise perfectly good page. Asim Led 12:15, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Pick your battles, Nikola. Don't try to rewrite history. People have been convicted in the Hague for this.

From 1992-1995, Sarajevo endured over three years of siege by the Bosnian Serb forces during the Yugoslav wars.

On April 6, 1992, Sarajevo was surrounded by forces of Bosnian Serbs. The warfare that lasted until the October of 1995 resulted in large scale destruction and dramatic population shifts (See Siege of Sarajevo for details).

Considering the prosecutions for crimes against humanity that followed, methinks that's fairly neutral - and fairly undisputable. Ambi 17:11, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hmm, how can it be Bosnian government propaganda like Nikola claims when almost 50% of Bosnian government ministers are Serbs, including Defense and Foreign Affairs. Are they some kind of “traitors” according to Nikola? What happened to Sarajevo was not some kind of a “legitimate siege” as the Hague’s tribunal has shown, of course, maybe Nikola doesn’t acknowledge the Hague’s tribunal. Even Milosevic once said it (the siege) was an overkill. GeneralPatton 22:47, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] map

The less terse discussion about this thing is at the history of Sarajevo Canton and Talk:Sarajevo Canton. I'll also need to find the archive of FAC to see if there's further discussion there. --Joy [shallot] 12:19, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] numbers

"Its population was 429,672 according to the 1991 census, and is estimated to be around 300,000 residents today" is misleading since most of what now is Sarajevo Canton was used to be counted as city in 1991. You also have to account for areas now in RS... The actually population of the city itself has actually increased, not declined. GeneralPatton 13:48, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Actually 429,672 was the population of the city itself (novi grad, novo sarajevo, stari grad, centar), with the metro area having more than 500,000. In the federation the city now has 300,000 people (metro area about 400,000). Regarding the regions in Republika Srpska, so called Serb Sarajevo is pretty small, (It can't even really be considered a city, more of a municipality), and official statistics (if any exist) are probably unreliable. Either way it is technically a completely seperate city so either way. Asim Led 17:14, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] FA excerpt

This doesn't appear in the main article, but on the "featured article" except it says that Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated by "Serbian agents." He was killed by a lone nut gunman, and although other would-be assassins made their own attempts that day, each was acting alone. - TJSwoboda 03:49, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Somebody added that to make it fit better on the front page. I agree its pointless, and it looks almost pov to have Serbs mentioned that way twice on the front page. Im going to go remove it. Asim Led 04:18, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Urban stereotypes

I wonder if the sentence "If one were to describe the stereotypes of Sarayliyas in one word, it would be cosmopolitan. Sarayliyas are known for being modern cultured city dwellers. Bosnians from outside Sarajevo are thought to have the sense that Sarajevo receives too much attention, but this is more of a sibling rivalry than an actual dislike for Sarajevo and its people." really belongs in there. I am not saying that it is true or untrue, having never visited Bosnia myself. However I don't think it really adds anything the article, especially since the same thing could be said of any capital city in the world, and it is not part of an encyclopedic style text.

UnHoly 00:22, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• I agree with UnHoly. This can be said of most other large cities. I removed the text. --Maintain 08:08, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Main picture?

Which of these is better for the main picture? Asim Led 04:25, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Football

"The two football clubs, FK Sarajevo and NK Željezničar Sarajevo, both have a long tradition of competing in European and World Cups tournaments." - but the World Cup is for national teams? Something's wrong here, not sure what it should be corrected to though! --VivaEmilyDavies 07:44, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Correct. FIFA World Cup is a national team competition. Željo and Sarajevo only competed in European Cup tournaments: Cup UEFA, UEFA Champions League, and UEFA Cup Winner's Cup. --SaninSaracevic 17:15, 09 Dec 2005 (IST). 11:44, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The alleged ethnic cleansing

Among the more controversial topics regarding the siege of Sarajevo is the alleged ethnic cleansing that took place at the time. Namely, after several years in the 1990s characterised by denial of the widely held view of the Serb role in the Yugoslav wars, a trend has developed in the 2000s where Serb nationalists have attempted to draw Bosniak and Croat parallels to such infamous examples of attrocities as Banja Luka and Srebrenica. Regarding Sarajevo, the typical claim is that between 1992 and 1995, 150,000 Serbs were ethnically cleansed from Sarajevo, with several thousand killed. The allegations were brought to the media forefront in early 2005 when the premier of Republika Srpska, Pero Bukejlović, claimed that genocie was committed against Serbs during the siege of Sarajevo that exceeded that of the Srebrenica massacre.

Such claims are, upon careful analysis, fairly easy to refute. First of all, the often cited number of 150,000 ethnically cleansed Serbs is impossible, considering that there were only around 150,000 Serbs in Sarajevo. For such ludicrous claims to be true, every single Serb in the entire Sarajevo region would had to have been ethnically cleansed. The mere existance of some 40.000 Serbs in the Sarajevo area today refutes this. Furthermore, the number of killed and wounded in the siege of Sarajevo has been carefully documented. Out of 12,000 people killed, around one fourth were ethnic Serbs or people of Serbian ancestry. Taking into account civilian and military deaths, the number of Serbs killed is relatively proportional to the percent of the Sarajevo population they made up at the time.

Asides from these documented victims there were, according to the international red cross[1], only 242 ethnically Serb missing persons in the Sarajevo area. Granted this is a significant number nontheless, but when it's taken into account that the number of missing persons for various towns in East Bosnia is in the thousands, the popular nationalist claim is proven baseless. Furthermore, the ability of the bosnian government to stage a genocide of such a magnitude while under siege and being perpetually bombarded is highly questionable. The Hague has yet to make any accusations for individuals that had a role in the alleged Sarajevo genocide, which cannot be said of most major centers of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Commander Musana Topalovic Cace did commit crimes against Sarajevo citizens in 1993, but he was quickly liquidated by the government. Certainly it is plausible that some Serbs were ethnically cleansed, but more than likely these were isolated incidents and not a consequence of direct government action or strategy. Tellingly, though hundreds of mosques in Republika Srpska were demolished, no orthodox church was harmed during, or following, the siege of Sarajevo.

Of course the question remains; what happened to the 100,000+ Serbs who are no longer in the city? It must be noted that following the siege of Sarajevo the population of the city had srunk by around 250,000 people, meaning that besides Serbs 150,000 former citizens of Sarajevo of different ethnicities were also no longer there. Ethnic cleansing had certainly occured in areas of the city held by Serb radicals; Ilidza, for example, had 9 detention camps for non-Serbs. It is no secret that Karadzic's intention was to split the city into two at a point that would have required the ethnic cleansing of over 150,000 Bosniaks and Croats. Once the war was over and Sarajevo firmly in the hands of the Bosniak-Croat federation, it is understandable that many Serbs would not have wanted to stay in a city where they would have been viewed with suspicion and been a clear minority. In the communities of Grbavica and Ilidza, seized by Serb radicals during the siege, Serbs looted and destroyed what was left of the area to make life harsher for returning Bosniak and Croat refugees. Upon the return of the ethnically cleansed, the remaining Serb community was harrased and looked upon with suspicion, pushing many more to leave the city as well[2]. Thousands of the Serbs who had left the city by then went to what is today "East Sarajevo", a politically distinct Sarajevo suburb that in reality is virtually indistinguishable from the rest of the city and home to a couple dozen thousand Serbs. Leading up to the siege itself, the Serb forces surrounding the city had allowed many Serb citizens to leave while forcing members of other nationalities to stay behind.

Today, Sarajevo citizens of all nationalities generally take accusations of ethnic cleansing in Sarajevo during the war as a highly offensive insult. In response to premier Bukejlovic's statement, many have demanded a public apology to all Sarajevo citizens. The president of the Serb citizens council/Citizen's movement for equality, Mirko Pejanovic, stated that "Nobody, not even Bukejlovic, can change or cover up the truth for the sake of current political needs. In Sarajevo, during the four year siege carried out by Karadzic's military forces and the SDS, there were deaths of Sarayliyas of all ethnicities. The people were both suffering and dying from hunger, cold, they were being killed by mortar shells... among the 12,000 killed Sarayliyas recorded in the war, at least one fourth were members of the Serb nation or had Serb ethnic ancestry. Thus, we can not talk of an extermination or genocide of Serbs, but of a responsibilty of the SDS and Karadzic's military forces for the overall extermination of Sarajevo and Sarayliyas, and within that of the Serb people" Asim Led 20:55, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Alleged" ?

Have some respect when you write. Hitler denied his crimes and so did the Chetniks. Ask my family who was in the city if it was "alleged". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.116.184.239 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 7 April 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Specific government dates

Just one minor point. In the government section, it notes the "current" mayor and the "current" split of the City Council. Could someone change these into "As of ..." links, with the years specified? Also, could someone link in the proper political parties? --Ricky81682 (talk) 21:18, May 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pigeon Square

Can somebody puh-leeze mention Pigeon Square? I can't remember the local term for it. You know, the place with the fountain and all the pigeons. Sebilj! That's it! I just remembered! But I know nothing about the fountain or its significance or if the pigeons are the Rock Apes to Sarajevo's Gibraltar or anything like that. I'm just a Canuck kid who lived in the city for 12 months. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.180.217.134 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Photos

Everyone, how hard is it to use good photos of Sarajevo represent the city on this page? The ones that are up here are absolutely terrible in quality and utterly unflattering to the beauty that Sarajevo represents. Please do not remove the photos I am about to post because I take I take quality of the photos in a serious light. User:Zyklonic 19:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fact Check?

This article seems to have more people watching it, so I'm going to ask here. An anonymous user recently changed the populations on the List of cities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, changing Sarajevo's population rather drastically. I see no rational for the changes, but I don't want to just *assume* vandalism when I have no personal knowledge of the situation. Could someone who knows better than I do have a look? Thanks. MBlume 18:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] sarajevo my home

i love what i've done with the article ;-)
now the world will see sarajevo's beauty, not 'political magazines' or war damage —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bosna 101 (talk • contribs) 07:07, 17 June 2006 (UTC).

[edit] religion (4.1)

could someone please fix what i tried doing? in section 4.1 (demographics.. religion) i put up 4 pictures next to each other, but i noticed if i go to a higher resoultion (e.g. 1152X852).. then the ECONOMY section bounces up to the right of the 4 pictures.. how do i make it so ECONOMY section stays below ALL 4 pictures?

THANKS! Bosna 101 00:24, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Some questions/suggestions

Starting from the bottom up:

• In terms of ordering of sections, I believe WP:MOS suggests See Also, Notes, References, followed by External links last.
• The website of the city is listed in References as well as External links. I believe anything listed as a Reference is not also listed in External links.
• Twin cities is wikilinked in the heading: I think WP:MOS says to avoid that. It should probably have a main article template.

Sandy 15:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Joelr31 took care of this. What else can be done to change the remove notes on the FARC? --Maintain 06:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Sarajevotramway.JPG

What is going on with Image:Sarajevotramway.JPG? I'm getting "no file exists", but it renders here without a problem. Is this some sort of bug? Jkelly 03:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

It is fine on my end, but all the links are suddenly underlined. Maybe a developer is experimenting with the codes. --Maintain 03:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Must have been something like that, as it is now rendering properly for me as well. Jkelly 15:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sound

Anyone care to record an .ogg of the local pronounciation as many other cities have? --Joffeloff 21:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I made a spoken wikipedia article for this article[3]. However, I uploaded it to wikipedia commons as many people have advocated, and the given procedures for linking to a Spoken Wikipedia article don't take that into account. If someone can educate me on how to link to it here and there and within the article that would be great. My regrets to any people from the Balkans who Balk at my garbled pronunciation, I tried my best :( Dan Carkner 19:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] On population

The Federation government source is NOT VERIABLE! You say that Sarajevo has 308 000 citizen just because the Federal government is saying that.

But the federal government is also saying that Cazin has more citien than Bihac????

They are also saying that VELIKA KLADUSA has more citizen than Sanski most!?!?!?!?!?!?

I suggest to remove this source cause it is not veriable.

For you who doesnt know the difference between Velika Kladusa and Sanski most, please look up it on Google and you will se that Velika kladusa is not a bigger city than Sanski most. Thunderman 20:26, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wrong comment

There is a photo of a building with a comment "The Parliament building in Sarajevo nearing reconstruction completion." That is not a Parliament building, the P. building is just few meters from that building, but that building is supposed to be a place where all the ministries are (I do not know how you call it). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.158.33.51 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC).

You are correct. However, I do not know what it is called either. :\ Vseferović 22:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Incorrect information added to the first few sections

Kahriman, you told me to "check again" so I did. Once again, I'm reverting the page because virtually all the changes added since my last edit to that part of the article have been incorrect. "Olympic City" was a semi-notable designation, but it's not the most popular nickname; the European Jerusalem and Rajvosa are just two that are far more deserving. The city of Sarajevo is NOT part of Republika Srpska because this article and that infobox deal with the OFFICIAL city of Sarajevo - a political territory exclusively within the Federation of BiH. All the various numbers and statistics are flat-out false because the originals were obtained from the official city of Sarajevo website - it is incredibly exasparating to see random IP adresses super-sizing Sarajevo's "estimated" population to wild figures such as 800,000 and I'd strongly suggest protecting the page from anonymous users. The line about Herzegovina sometimes being spelled with a C is completely irrelevent and doesn't deserve mention in an article on Sarajevo. Live Forever 23:08, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Missing photo?

What happened to that great photo of Sarajevo at night? This one is lame, plus it looks too big. Also, the photo of a synagogue is from war. Since than it has been completely reconstructed (it is even different colour). And that is the ugliest representation of ćevapi I have ever seen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.158.33.93 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

I completely agree. Some Wikipedia members believe that there are copyright issues (Most likely true...) with the nice image of Sarajevo during nighttime.

Correct, that image of "ćevapi" has to be changed... :P Thanks, Vseferović 14:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)