Talk:Statistical regions of Serbia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Statistical regions of Serbia article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Serbia Low‑importance

	Serbia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geography Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Start This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

NUTS hoax

The Serbian NUTS table is a hoax.

Serbia is not shown on the latest NUTS map here
Serbia is not mentioned in the 2010 NUTS catalogue here
Serbia is not mentioned in the latest update to NUTS, here.
This list of non-EU countries using NUTS does not mention Serbia.

I can understand why some editors are really keen to insert this content, because it treats Kosovo as part of Serbia, but it's not real. I challenged this but Whitewriter never replied. Another side to the POV-pushing is that even though the table blatantly contradicts what reliable sources say, it gets added nonetheless; but when I try making other wholly factual additions which don't fit the kosovo-is-serbia mindset, they get reverted. Even when I point out on a talkpage that content is incompatible with sources, that gets reverted by a sock. bobrayner (talk) 07:28, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why do Antidiskriminator and WhiteWriter repeatedly reinsert hoaxes? bobrayner (talk) 13:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on. The NUTS-1 division is supposed to be official, at least on the internal Serbian level. It is published in

Government of Serbia (2010), Uredba o nomenklaturi statističkih teritorijalnih jedinica (in Serbian), Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, p. 2 {{citation}}: line feed character in |title= at position 7 (help)

Now, I'm not sure whether the government of Serbia has prerogatives to proclaim NUTS without sanctioning from the EU. I suppose not, particularly as it affects the Kosovo status. But it is not a "hoax". The paper

Vuković, Darko (8 July 2011), "NOMENCLATURE OF STATISTICAL TERITORIAL UNITS: POSSIBILITIES OF APPLICATION IN SERBIA" (PDF), Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” {{citation}}: line feed character in |title= at position 46 (help)

states in the abstract that "NUTS 1 and NUTS 3 classification are less applicable in Serbia due to inadequate institutional support, lack of political will or the high costs of regionalization" [...] "According to NUTS 1 classification, regional division is theoretically possible in Serbia. Having in mind that NUTS 1 classification purports territories of 3 to 7 million inhabitants in size, Serbia could only theoretically be divided into two regions: Northern and Southern Serbia."

That sort of contradicts the very words of the Government's bylaw, which predates the paper for at least a year. It would probably be fair to describe the Serbian NUTS-1 classification as only an initiative (or wishful thinking, if you like). I can find several papers and reports, but all of them from Serbia, referencing the said statistical regions. This paper by ESPON [1] (p.7) from March 2011 discusses the possibility to include Albania, Serbia, Montenegro, BiH and Kosovo into NUTS nomenclature, and mentions the said bylaw at pp.25-26:

"In 2009, the Serbian parliament adopted the Law on Equal Territorial Development that formed seven statistical regions on the territory of Serbia. The Law was amended on 7 April 2010, so that the number of regions was reduced to five [...]According to the above, the statistical regions and their NUTS codes are: RS: Serbia RS1: Serbia - North [...] RS2: Serbia - South [...]As we have mentioned, the statistical NUTS1 and NUTS2 regions created by the government in order to meet the NUTS criteria as well as the requirements of the EU regional policy, do not have actually a considerable administrative power; also, they are not self-governed entities. The political criterion prevailed for their creation."

Hope that clears some issues. No such user (talk) 14:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your hard work.

I think the implications for Kosovo's status help explain why editors treated this obscure proposal as though it were a real thing. They aren't real NUTS regions, and can't be, on multiple levels; but instead of being framed as some kind of obscure unilateral government proposal, it was treated as a real EU activity, across various pages, along with some other content forking:

Local administrative unit: [2]
Southern Serbia (NUTS 1): [3]
Northern Serbia: [4]
Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics: [5]
Statistical regions of Serbia: [6] (note that when I changed the map caption from "Map of NUTS 2 statistical regions of Serbia" to "Map of statistical regions used by the Serbian government" it got reverted three times)
NUTS of Serbia: [7]

"Hoax" still looks like a pretty good description. And when I tried raising the problem on a talkpage, it got reverted by a sock. Just another day in the Balkans... bobrayner (talk) 15:53, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great discussion here. Unfortunately, action lacking. I have made two articles, split, with clear distinguish between the two: statistical regions and NUTS Serbia regions.--AirWolf ^talk 04:31, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]