Talk:University of Pristina/Archive 3

Archive 1

What happened with the Archive 1? Why has it been deleted?--Andrija 22:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

It remained at Talk:University of Prishtina/Archive 1 :-) I don't know what is done in these cases, whether to move the archive too, or simply modify the link at the top of this talk page. - Best regards, Ev 04:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

DISPUTED

I am declaring this article as disputed, placing the {{disputed}} tag, warning against its lack of neutrality based on the following main reasons:

1) It yields legality to an establishment (named University of Priština) located outside Prishtina, with smaller student body and lack of accreditation from the Kosovar government

2) Though it may contain sufficient sources for Wikipedia standards, the selection of references, virtually all Serbian sources, lacks diversity and conspicuously biased to reflect a Serbian ultranationalist view

3) The description on the introduction of the Albanian language as a language of instruction and the historical developments of the university, especially its effect on the advancement of the native Albanian population of Kosovo, is a paraphrase of racist anti-Albanian propaganda manufactured by Serbian ultranationalists

--Getoar (talk) 22:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

1) An university of Serbia does not need accreditation from the Kosovar government. That the university is legal you can see at the official site of the Ministry of Education of Serbia [1].

2) This is not true. About half of sources are Serbian, which should not be surprising for an university of Serbia. Not a single source is ultranationalist.

3) Do you have any evidence for that claim? In particular, effect of the university on advancement of Albanian population of Kosovo (instead of training students for technical careers, the university specialized in liberal arts; This created a large pool of unemployed but highly educated, and resentful, Albanians) is sourced to a non-Serbian source.

Nikola (talk) 08:27, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

You are missing the larger picture here, but let me explain:

1) University of Prishtina is in Kosovo and not in Serbia. Wikipedia is descriptive and describing means describing reality, not pompous and pathetic claims.

2) The non-Serbian sources are statistical information about the number of students at UP and contain no significance for the remainder of the article.

3) In the contrary, these Serbian sources present the introduction of Albanian as an instruction language as a forceful measure, implying it was an unnecessary act of an anti-Serbian government. You should consider that the superiority of the Serbian language throughout this period was a forceful and derogatory measure in an Albanian-inhabited land. Your judgment about the educational orientation of UP is personal and ill-grounded. There is no consideration for the vast number of individuals who mastered natural sciences, medicine and other fields, regardless of the constricted opportunities and facilities inflicted by the dictatorial regime of the time. Specialization in liberal arts requires, on the other hand, fewer facilities and does not serve as an indication for resentfulness or perilous nationalism.

I will soon come up with a refined and unbiased version of this article, so please do not play a destructive role in the efforts of the Wikipedia community to provide with such NPOV information.--Getoar (talk) 20:24, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

1) Kosovo is in Serbia, and if you believe otherwise, you have been misinformed.

2) Majority of Serbian sources are likewise used for statistical information. There are non-Serbian sources used for the university history.

3) If the UP was started by the University of Belgrade and in the first period was staffed by the University of Belgrade staff, then use of Serbian language really could not be called forceful and derogatory, but rather something absolutely normal and expectable. If a source exists which says that introduction of Albanian was forceful, and no source exists that says otherwise, then there is no reason not to believe it. Belgrade, and if its I have absolutely no judgement about the educational orientation of UP. Complain to Julie A. Mertus to whom this is sourced, not to me.

If by that you mean that you will continue reverting to that old version you have been reverting before, I don't think so. Nikola (talk) 17:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I will only continue this discussion for the sake of the Wikipedia community; for you already have my answers and it is unnecessary to reiterate my points and foster the development of your reading skills. I am very careful about my word choices, so anyone from your position should first read carefully before jumping into a pseudo-rebuttal that completely misses its main objective.

That I do not consume your time, please look for the words such as “virtually,” “superiority,” whereas the mere presence of one or a few source does not place you in an advantage considering the biased fundament of the article. Non-Serbian sources are yet negligible with the bibliography remaining a selection of one-sided, and the side they take is indisputably the Serbian one.

Reverting will not be required since the University of Prishtina has entered now a new stage in its history and has a lot to offer to the community writing an encyclopedia article for it. I will insist in shortening out the history of the university and the inclusion of information about many programs, national and international, that are being carried out by the university. Moreover, the University of Mitrovica should definitely be moved out of the page, being assigned its separate one. I would not object a referral to this institution, but I will continue to challenge biased, POV being served to the honorable users of Wikipedia. The current state of the article is a very extreme example of lack of neutrality.--Getoar (talk) 23:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

NAME ISSUE

The official website of the university suggests that we use the name University of Prishtina as the main article title. Other redirect pages would be helpful.--Getoar (talk) 22:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The other official website uses the name University of Pristina[2]. A name vote has recently been closed. Nikola (talk) 08:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Grand mistification

The above is a most biased and untrue statement -- note the domain on that link -- .yu as in Yugoslavia: http://www.pr.ac.yu/ . This is an old domain favored in Serbia by people with Greater Serbia aspirations and nostalgia for Yugoslavia, a figment of the past.

This is complete nonsense. Transition to .rs domain is expected to occur within this year anyway. Nikola (talk) 04:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The only official use for the Kosovan university in question is University of Prishtina', as evidenced by how other universities and international organizations, such as the University of Iowa that partner with it call it: http://international.uiowa.edu/accents/07fall/prishtina.asp .

Or the International Center on Responses to Catastrophes at the University of Illinois at Chicago: http://www.psych.uic.edu/ICORC/projects/hiv.shtml .

Or Dartmouth College: The Dartmouth Initiative in Global Health and Healthy Development references the University of Prishtina School of Medicinie: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~globalhealth/global-health/projectexamples.html

And here is the University of Prishtina's entry on the nonpartisan website "The Language of Education - Dictionary and Research Guide", which merely lists universities with basic info and links: http://www.123exp-orgs.com/t/00514482658/ -- please note that in this obvious snapshot from time past, the English Wikipedia article and link and name both read: University of Prishtina. This has been systematically adulterated since, including the introduction of a veritable link farm in the External links sections, where all links have been less than convincingly explicitly marked as "Official", and all are pointing to Serbian pages or subpages of one or two extension campuses or satellite campuses in places like Mitrovica in Serbian enclaves in Kosovo, or even to disembodied pages maintained in Serbian domains such as .yu . This is all grand mistification or falsificaton. Note that even the Latin name of the university as given in the previous link is "Prishtiniensis": "UNIVERSITY OF PRISHTINA; University of Priština (Serbian: Универзитет у Приштини, Albanian: Universiteti i Prishtinës, Latin: Universitas Studiorum Prishtiniensis) is public university in Kosovo. It was opened in the beginning of 1970." Note that this entry still shows the old English name "University of Priština" which has since been replaced by "University of Prishtina: http://www.uni-pr.edu/ (see masthead in English and Albanian, page still only in Albanian; there are no Srpski or English versions yet).

And here is the page of the Dr. Myzafere Limani, Professor and Dean of Faculty University of Prishtina, where, among other things, she writes about being expelled together with other faculty by "the regime in Belgrade", and staying in Kosovo instead of going abroad. Now they all are back, teaching at and running the University of Prishtina: http://www.engineergirl.org/?id=6057

And here is the University of Prishtina's Human Rights Centre, established in 2000, after Serbia lost control of the University: http://www.humsec.eu/cms/index.php?id=390 . Yes, it is in Prishtina, not in ...Serbia, and is part of the HUMSEC project funded by the European Commission and run from Graz, Austria, with cooperation of several universities, including Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, a real Serbian institution, not a pretend-one.

I suggest we return this hijacked article to contemporary reality without undue delay. --Mareklug ^talk 16:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Mareklug, I truly value your successful efforts at explaining the reality about the University of Prishtina. There is an urgency to move the University of Mitrovica to a separate page and keep this article for UP. I am currently unable to offer any assistance, but I will get back to this later during the week.--Getoar (talk) 17:13, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

That University of Mitrovica you mention simply does not exist. The official page of the university is very clear about its name. Nikola (talk) 04:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed: http://www.pr.ac.yu/en/pocetna.php clearly states right at the masthead: University of Pristina Kosovska Mitrovica, which I expressed in the correct idiom of English language as: "University of Pristina at Kosovska Mitrovica", which is how such things are routinely expressed, see; University at Buffalo, University of Illinois at Chicago, University of California at Santa Cruz, University of New York at Stony Brook, Unviersity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, etc. Why did you, Nikola Smolenski, forcibly revert my updating the article, updating the links and references (including the one given above), considering the sorry state of the references the newest one being from 2005. It still needs more. However, the lead correctly reflects after my update the dichotomy of the university situation, and the external links section conforms to the WP:EL and WP:SPAM policies, by linking only to the official web pages of the institutions (not subpages) and certainly not only the Serbian entity's. Please don't revert my NPOV improvements to the slanted and outdated version. Thank you. --Mareklug ^talk 07:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Please help restore this article to NPOV, verified, neutrally sourced current information

I have done some preliminary much needed updates to this neglected and abused article, restoring it to NPOV, updated state as far as basic information is concerned, by including a neutrally cast description in the lead that addresses the dichotomy that has arisen, with University of Prishtina in Prishtina and University of Pristina at Kosovska Mitrovica (these names are taken from the respective mastheads of the respective official webpages, in the case o Serbian entity, its English-language version; the Albanian entity has no English-language version yet, but it's masthead contains the English-language name it uses). The permanent link to my edit is: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=University_of_Pri%C5%A1tina&oldid=205737810

Please review my version for neutrality and accuracy, and note my addition of new sources, as the ones already in the article were entirely Serbia-based or Serbian-based, and the article in fact made-pretend that the University of Prishtina, the entity on the ground in the capital of Kosovo, simply does not exist. My improvements were summarily reverted forcibly with a misleading edit summary alledging POV edits ny User:Nikola Smolenski.

Please help build consensus, as well as verify my updates. I also introduced an additonal POV template in the References section, a all the references there (prior to my adding the various international sources) were reflecting one side, the Serbian view of things, and most of these are several years old. For example, I added the current official link to the University of Pristina at Kosovska Mitrovica, and placed its description ahead of the Kosovo Albanian-staffed university in Prishtina in the lead -- hardly POV edits, I like to think. --Mareklug ^talk 07:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Resolving the edit conflict

Hi, I've been asked by User:Nikola Smolenski to participate in this article. It appears there is an edit conflict between these two versions: Mareklug v. Nikola Smolenski. I believe the best way to resolve this conflict would be if both sides list their reasons for differences versus the other version. If everyone is OK with this then, since Nikola was the one who asked me to join, I think it would be fair of him to start. RegardsOsli73 (talk) 09:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I see these problems with the edits:

1. They are trying to replace "University of Priština" with "University of Prishtina", despite the fact that a vote about the name was concluded a month and half ago.
2. "is at present two public universities located in Kosovo" is grammatically incorrect at best.
3. Template:Verify credibility is attached to source #2 for no particular reason, even though the credibility of this source has been thoroughly discussed before.
4. The two universities are in the introduction separated in a bullet-point list which is not common for an introduction. And the descriptions given in the list are bogus:
   1. Name "University of Pristina at Kosovska Mitrovica" is being introduced for the Serbian university. While this descriptive name is occasionally used, and that fact could perhaps be mentioned somewhere, this is not the name of the university.
   2. Phrase "Serbian entity displaced from Serbian at the time Priština," does not mean anything.
   3. "but under the name University of Mitrovica, according to Serbian sources[3]" is complete nonsense, the university does not use that name, the source is not Serbian, and it does not say that the university uses that name anyway.
5. It is written that in "Serbia'a view" the Serbian university has the legal continuity, this implies that another view exists in which it does not have it.
6. Albanian university is said to be "recognized internationally by universities and international organizations cooperatng with it" but these universities and organisations have no power of legal recognition. I'm perfectly fine with noting all sorts of cooperation that exist; I'm not OK with implying that they equal legal recognition.
7. Phrase "Five years ago, the university had been described as being" in not very appropriate.
8. Phrase "located physically in Prishtina, now the capital of the Republic of Kosovo" is not appropriate, first because it uses spelling Prishtina instead of Priština or Pristina, second because it uses separatist term "Republic of Kosovo".
9. It is again claimed that the Serbian university is called "University in Mitrovica", again without any evidence.
10. "with the formal independence of Kosovo [...] the University of Prishtina, in Albanian-language version, occupying the campus in the capital of Kosovo, is the chief university of the new country" implies that Kosovo is independent and that it is a new country.
11. Claims that the Albanian university "is viewed as the real successor of the old University of Priština" while neither of the four references simply does not mention anything even remotely similar.
12. URLs related to the Serbian university are being removed from the external links. There is no particular reason not to have them.
13. Template Template:Serbian universities as well as Category:Serbian culture and other appropriate categories are being removed from the article. Even if Kosovo would tomorrow become independent and if Serbia would recognise it, this university is still a university of Serbia and there is no reason for it not to be in appropriate categories.

Nikola (talk) 19:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Nikola. If Mareklug could now please respons to all of these points above. Then we will be having a structured and productive discussion. Excellent! CheersOsli73 (talk) 20:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I am travelling right now -- this will have to wait for me perhaps a day. Of course, I'm sure there are other people with views on the matter. In any case, I will need a little time. I will briefly say about spelling Prishtina -- this is not my invention; this is how all the sources I cited and the university itself refer to the Albanian part of this dichotomy. I don't think we have any choice in the matter but report what the world uses in this context. Certainly altering sources is out of the question. May I add, the issue of Prishtina being called that by the official web sites of the government (President's, Premier's, Government Portals's) as well as the Municipality of Prishtina itself (its webpage, its International Airport) and infrastructure providers for Kosovo (Post Office - POSTA, Telephone provider PTK, internet provider IPKO) has all been documented in the ongoing RFC about how to refer to the city. I quite deliberately refered to Prishina in the context of University of Prishtina and to Priština in the context of the Serbian entity and the time frame when its expulsion took place. The name of University of Pristina at Kosovska Mitrovica comes directly from its own English language webpage -- they chose to omit the diacritic there. Again, I think we have little choice but to reflect in our usage various contexts and be sensitive to competing viewpoints, and use the most appropriate spelling (all three are specified in the article of the city, so it is not a matter of choosing the only allowed one). Hope this will tide you over for now. Please verify all the refrences I included in the article -- they determine the content, not Wikipedian's predilections and allegiances. And I dont' have a horse in this race -- my edits are here to put best, most accurate and neutral and verified content into articles, whatever they may concern. I hope we can count on impartiality all around. It's necessary. Thank you. --Mareklug ^talk 21:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick response Mareklug. Please do not feel stressed if you are travelling. Regarding your answer above, I understand it to deal mainly with Nikola's point no. 1 above, what the name of the Kosovar Albanian and Serb entities should be called. I'll take a look at the sources you refer to and get back. Nikola, do you have any comment on the naming issue? Cheers allOsli73 (talk) 21:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Only one: the move request has been closed mere two months ago (see /Archive 2#Requested move to University of Pristina or Priština). All the examples introduced here by Mareklug don't show that there aren't plenty more examples of different usage. Nikola (talk) 19:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I am hoping that this tripartite discussion is in no way an attempt to disregard my serious persistence in the re-composition of the article to reflect neutrality and reality. I have offered my reasons for opening up the dispute on the article’s factual accuracy and I can ensure you that the article will not achieve true Wikipedia standards unless:

1)The current article is dedicated to University of Prishtina

2)A separate page is created for the educational entity in Mitrovica with a name consensus among contributors involved

3)A rewrite of the article reflects unbiased and neutral information of the current article

4)A careful redaction of the new article offers true factual accuracy and high Wikipedia standards

This is a compromise offer to be declined only beyond rationality. Thank you!--Getoar (talk) 03:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

It was not my intention to exclude you or disregard anyone (I am uneasy with a purported mediation between me and Nikola, as if no one else's edits and discussion were involved.) Everyone, I just attempted to enlist User:ChrisO to help us here: [4]. --Mareklug ^talk 07:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but what is this a compromise of? What two positions exist, so that this proposal is a compromise between them?

Everyone knows it, it is stated clearly in the article and repeatedly in talk: two separate universities exist, both use the same name, both claim the same continuity. If a separate page for the Serbian university is made, I will simply redirect it to here. Claiming that the Albanian university is the University of Pristina is simply at odds with the reality. Nikola (talk) 19:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at the University of Prishtina. Un. of Pristina (this article) should redirect here, and the Serbian institution should have a separate page. The current disputed material should simply be deleted.--Getoar (talk) 07:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

On the name issue, it seems quite clear to me. We should have two separate articles:

• University of Prishtina - article about the Albanian university
• University of Pristina - article about the Serbian university.

These are the names and spelling both universities use on their respective websites [5][[6]]. Of course, both articles will have to mention up top that there is another article on the 'opposing' university. Could we all agree on this? It would solve a lot of issues. RegardsOsli73 (talk) 12:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Osli73, don't forget that University of Pristina in Mitrovica is internationally recognized (by EU UN etc etc) as Univeristy in Mitrovica --Noah30 (talk) 17:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

No it isn't. They may call it so, occasionally, they may call it "that university over there", but they can't rename it. Nikola (talk) 19:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Osli73, you are on the right track and I truly appreciate your efforts. After all, both institutions regardless of their legal status deserve more respect if there is even a bit of academia in their inherence. The current disputed article is not a representation of academic institutions, but national disputes between Kosovo and Serbia. My modification to your proposal would be to use both University of Prishtina (as the primary article) and University of Pristina (as a redirect) for the legal Albanian university located in Prishtina. The Serbian establishment, however, could use an alternative name (e.g. University of Mitrovica). My only concern is the superiority given to the Serbs; Pristina is still the primary spelling for the Kosovar capital on Wikipedia and it must refer to it on all ocassions. Therefore when one thinks about the university located in the capital city they should be able to find it easily. Running into an article about an establishment that is not located where the article name indicates would be misleading to our valuable Wikipedia community. Again, thank you for trying to understand my concerns and thank you for mediating in this previously inextricable dispute.--Getoar (talk) 15:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

@Osli73: The link which you gave, while throughout its document, indeed, the University represents itself as "University of Pristina", nonetheless prominently contains on the masthead an animated text on two lines: University of Pristina (and right below it) Kosovska Mitrovica (in equal size). Furthermore, in the International Cooperation section, I found this passage: On June 7th 2007, the University of Pristina, temporarily seated in Kosovska Mitrovica, signed contract of cooperation with the University of Banja Luka. And, as 2 other editors have already noted in this section, we cannot afford to mislead worldwide readers of Wikipedia that this university is located in Prisina/Prishtina/Prištima, the capital of Kosovo, when it actually "is seated", however "temporarily", in a distant city of Kosovska Mitrovica and funded by the government of Serbia. Since there is a disconnect between what the university in Kosovska Mitrovica calls itself, and the name used my UNMIK (the agency that is still the recognized local governing authority by all parties to UN Resolution 1244, including Serbia), we must somehow indicate the totality of this circumstance in the article name, and pure University of Pristina simply won't do, if only for reasons of necessary disambiguation.

This distant city is 37 kilometers away. Nikola (talk) 19:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

@Nikola: If you reject the entirely NPOV and time-honored way to refer to a university with "at X" when it is an institution whose name is used "at Y" and maybe even "at Z" and several other places (such as University of California (at Berkeley, at Santa Cruz, at Los Angeles etc.) or University of Illinois (at Urbana-Champaign, at Chicago), perhaps you will aquiesce to: University of Pristina (Kosovska Mitrovica).

However, I still believe that my phrasing, as introduced already to the article, University of Pristina at Kosovska Mitrovica is the idiomatically and technically most correct English-language designation, following the custom and the convention applicable in the English language as far as naming universities goes, when they are named for far-away cities or other potentially confusing geographical entities, but are in fact situated far from it geographically or ambiguously -- in any event, at someplace. Another example is Indiana University of Pennsylvania, a small university in the town of Indiana, Pennsylvania in the state of Pennsylvania. It is a completely separate university, which has absolutely nothing in common with the huge state-run Indiana University (which has over 10 campuses throughout the state of Indiana, and its flagship campus is located in the city of Bloomington, Indiana, and it is that campus which is known internationally as Indiana University, but on Wikipedia it is lodged as Indiana University at Bloomington. I know something about this, since I went there for my graduate work. Please reconsider your objections, because the likely alternatives of University of Mitrovica or University at Mitrovica will be far less palatable options. --Mareklug ^talk 18:14, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

It seems to me that we actually have three distinct subjects here in this article: the original University of Priština up to 1999, the University of Prishtina in the Kosovo capital post-1999 and the University of Priština at Kosovska Mitrovica, also post-1999. Both of the latter two entities describe themselves as the legitimate continuations of the first, undisputed entity. The pre-1999 university clearly no longer exists in its original form. Its rival successors have only partial continuity with the pre-1999 university; the faculty has split and in the case of the Serbian university, it's no longer on the same campus or even the same city. Given this, I believe it would be worth doing a three-way split on the article: University of Priština (1970-1999) to cover the old university, University of Priština (Kosovksa Mitrovica) to cover the new Serbian university and University of Prishtina to cover the Albanian university. -- ChrisO (talk) 18:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

But Chris and Mareklug, the univeristy in Mitrovica is known and recognized as "University in Mitrovica". You can not have two University of Prishtina and your proposal to name the article on Serbian unveristy as University of Priština at Kosovska Mitrovica is not acceptable. For the first here at Wikipedia we use only Mitrovica. For the second this name would create confusion and lead people to think that the university in Mitrovica is a branch of the real University of Prishtina. For the third Serbs in Mitrovica use the name Univeristy of Pristina illegaly. Internationaly the univeristy is recognised as "University of Mitrovica" (link from European Univeristy Association: http://www.eua.be/index.php?id=48&no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=289&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=1). Also UNMIK that have control over Kosoo according to 1244 says the univeristy is recognized as University in Mitrovica. --Noah30 (talk) 20:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

That is something that has been suggested before, and I can't say that I like it, but if there is no other solution, let it be. But I don't see why would Albanian university be the main article (without disambiguation). It would be more logical to make University of Priština the main article, with the history and links to University of Priština (Kosovska Mitrovica) and University of Prishtina (Priština). University of Prishtina would then be the redirect to University of Priština. Note also that what you are suggesting would encourage people to link to the Albanian university when writing about pre-1999 events. Nikola (talk) 19:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

By the way, do you volunteer to be constantly removing pre-1999 history from the two articles after they are made? ;) Nikola (talk) 19:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't trust your edits anymore after seeing how you push Serbian propaganda,especially in the Gazimestan speech article. I have also read some of your opinions on Albanians outside Wikipedia and I must say you have extreme, nationalist opinions on Albanians --Noah30 (talk) 20:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Please give links to those opinions so that other people might read them too. And what Serbian propaganda in the Gazimestan speech article? Nikola (talk) 22:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

ChrisO, I understand your efforts, but such a trifurcation is not only unnecessary; it is also legitimization of the Serbian view. I urge you to accept the version at « University of Prishtina » for the current article (Uni… of Pristina). The Serbian establishment needs to have an article of its own. It should be noted that the Serbs had the chance to be part of the accredited University of Prishtina, but declined the opportunity and rather chose to establish a parallel institution in Mitrovica. Therefore, they cannot claim “legal continuity” as in the article and they cannot adopt a name that is already in use.

Therefore, my proposed solution is this:

Main article: UNIVERSITY OF PRISHTINA

Redirect: UNIVERSITY OF PRISTINA

Redirect: UNIVERSITY OF PRIŠTINA

Main article: UNIVERSITY OF MITROVICA (Claimed name could be included in the article, but comparisons to Indiana University simply don't seem to fit here as long as the usage of its name by others has been condemned by the University of Prishtina and in legal sense the institution is called UM)--Getoar (talk) 20:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe Noah30 has rescued as just on time with his explanation. It’s now time to leave the ark and act. The current situation is not favorable.--Getoar (talk) 20:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

No, Noah30's explanation isn't compatible with NPOV. To quote WP:NPOV#A simple formulation, "Assert facts, including facts about opinions — but do not assert the opinions themselves." There's a dispute about which is the legitimate successor to the pre-1999 university, but it's not our place to decide which university is legitimate. We cannot declare which one is legitimate; to quote WP:NPOV again, "The policy requires that where multiple or conflicting perspectives exist within a topic each should be presented fairly. None of the views should be given undue weight or asserted as being judged as "the truth", in order that the various significant published viewpoints are made accessible to the reader, not just the most popular one." We must therefore state what the various parties say about the universities, but we cannot state as fact the opinion of one side or the other. As for names, we have to go with what the universities call themselves in English - thus "University of Pristina Kosovska Mitrovica" [7] and "University of Prishtina" [8]. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

ChrisO, it is important you understand that the University of Prishtina is fully accredited by the Kosovar government and is the same university established in 1970. It was founded back then by the Kosovar government and the Serbian government has historically been an obstacle, not a supporter of the university. The Serbs were offered to join UP, but they wanted their own institution, and their refusal to cooperate with the Kosovar government is a violation of the UN 1244 Resolution and cannot serve as ground for the legitimization of an ill-grounded claim. I will not endorse the use of the name Pristina in reference to the Serbian establishment, and I will vote to keep U. of Prishtina and Pristina for UP.--Getoar (talk) 23:16, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're missing the point. It's simply not our job to state which is the legitimate university. Of course we have to represent what the Kosovo government says, but WP:NPOV doesn't allow us to endorse its position. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Straw poll

OK, I'm getting confused. Could everyone just vote yes or no on the following:

1. University of Pristina as the article on the Serbian university (including a redirect from University of Mitrovica).
   1. Yes: This is what the university calls itself if you read the statutes of the university. The "yes" is providing that article 4 is also enacted.Osli73 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
   2. No:Getoar (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
   3. No:Mareklug ^talk 00:53, 19 April 2008 (UTC) (misleading and prone to creating confusion; Mitrovica must be indicated somehow; the university does it on its masthead anyway)
   4. No-- Cradel
   5. No--Noah30 (talk) 15:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC) Same reasons like Getoar
   6. Yes, providing that point 4, below, is also enacted. – Kieran T ^(talk) 17:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   7. No. It calls itself "University of Priština Kosovska Mitrovica" on its website [9], therefore our article should be titled the same. I'll add this option below. -- ChrisO (talk) 17:41, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

      No it most certainly does not. Nikola (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

   8. No If the articles are spli, the article about the Serbian university should be at "University of Pristina (Kosovska Mitrovica)". Nikola (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   9. Yes.The University calls itself "University of Pristina". That's also the name of its website and it has been mentioned in the very first sentence at the University's homepage ("Welcome to the University of Pristina"). Kosovska Mitrovica is only a location. Look at the article No. 4 of its Statute (http://www.pr.ac.yu/sr/pdf/statut_univerziteta_u_pristini.pdf): "The name of the University is Univerzitet u Prištini. The name of the University in English is University of Pristina... The seat of the University is in Priština, Vidovdanska [Street, No.] 93. Temporary seat of the University is in Kosovska Mitrovica, Filipa Višnjića b.b.". Ministry of Education of the Government of the Republic of Serbia also calls it "Univerzitet u Prištini" (University of Pristina or University of Priština); Kosovska Mitrovica has been mentioned only as a part of the current address, not as a part of the University's name (http://www.mps.sr.gov.yu/code/navigate.php?Id=156). --Andrija (talk) 21:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

      Andrija, the Serbian name of the University of Prishtina is "Univerzitet u Prištini" accordign to their statute. The University of Pristina/Prishtina is in Pristina. UNDERSTAND!!! --Noah30 (talk) 21:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

2. University of Pristina as a redirect page to University of Prishtina;
   1. Yes:Getoar (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
   2. Yes: Mareklug ^talk 00:53, 19 April 2008 (UTC) (Yes, because logically, Prishtina = Pristina in English and conceivably idiosyncratic manuals of style will dictate which string is used by what source, IMHO Prishtina is the only correct use, but actual usage follows its own dictum, and redirects from faulty names are part of Wikipedia policy)
   3. Yes-- Cradel;
   4. Yes --Noah30 (talk) 15:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC) Univeristy of Prishtina is in Prishtina and not in Mitrovica. Why is it so hard to understand?? And stop calling it an Albanian university. It is a Kosovar university where 98 % of the students are Albanians but the rest, 2% are non-Albanians and non-Serbs
   5. No: the Albanian university doesn't call itself by this name. ChrisO (talk) 00:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

      ChrisO your are wrong. In the statute of the university I found the following "Emri i Universitetit në gjuhën serbe është Univerzitet u Prištini" translated to English it means "The name of the university in Serbian language is Univerzitet u Prištini". The link: http://uni-pr.edu/Statutiversioniifundit.pdf

   6. No quite obviously the Albanian university refers to itself as "University of Prishtina" with the Albanian spelling, while the Serbian university refers to itself using the Serbian spelling (Pristina).Osli73 (talk) 17:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

      Read my answer to ChrisO, please!

      But untold thousands, trying to locate it in Wikipedia, will type in "University of Pristina" because in their neck of the woods "Pristina" is how the city is referred to. So, how the university refers to itself is not the only criterion involved. --Mareklug ^talk 22:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC). Mareklug, that is precisely why I propose no. 4 below - that each article have a header highlighting the existence of the other university. To avoid misunderstandings.Osli73 (talk) 22:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

   7. No, consistent with my vote/opinion in 1, above, and 3, below. – Kieran T ^(talk) 17:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   8. No, no need to redirect from usual English to Albanian spelling. Nikola (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   9. No. --Andrija (talk) 21:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
3. University of Prishtina as the article on the Albanian university.
   1. Yes: providing that article 4 is also enacted.Osli73 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
   2. Yes: Getoar (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
   3. Yes: Mareklug ^talk 00:53, 19 April 2008 (UTC) (unquestionable fact, undisputable on merit; the move away from this name was a concerted case of team POV-pushing and compromised Wikipedia)
   4. Yes: -- Cradel;
   5. Yes: --Noah30 (talk) 20:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   6. Yes, as per my votes/opinions above. – Kieran T ^(talk) 17:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   7. No, this implies that Albanian university is the University of Pristina, and would also encourage people to link to it inappropriately. If the article is split, the Albanian university should be at "University of Prishtina (Priština)". Nikola (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   8. Yes. We call organisations by the name that they call themselves. This is a long-established Wikipedia policy, established in WP:NPOV#Article naming: "Wikipedia takes a descriptive rather than prescriptive approach in such cases, describing corporate entities such as cities and states by the names by which they describe themselves (or by the English-language equivalent)." In this case, the university calls itself, in English, the "University of Prishtina". Policy requires that we use this name for the institution's article. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
4. Both articles will contain information at the top of the article informing about the existence of the other university.
   1. Yes:Osli73 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
   2. Yes: ChrisO (talk) 00:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   3. Yes: Mareklug ^talk 00:53, 19 April 2008 (UTC) (Again this is Wikipedia policy to provide DisambigR in confusing, lookalike article titles; the actual form of the "information" must be agreed on. It could be something like in John Cale.)
   4. Yes: -- Cradel;
   5. No:Getoar (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC);
   6. No: --Noah30 (talk) 20:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   7. Yes. If both exist, this ought to be an uncontroversial move by any editor who adopts Wikipedia's principles. It's effectively disambiguation for under-informed readers. – Kieran T ^(talk) 17:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   8. If they are split, yes. They should contain information about the third article also. Nikola (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   9. Yes. --Andrija (talk) 21:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
5. Neither article claims that its university is the 'real' University of Pristina/Prishtina. However, it can state that the university in question makes that statement (providing that direct sources for such as statement can be found).
   1. Yes: only if there is a direct statement of this should any such allegation be included. Otherwise the supporters of each university will try stuff their article with WP:OR supporting their view. Osli73 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC);
   2. NoYes: As far as I understand it, they do make this claim. It needs to be mentioned and cited, but it can't be endorsed by us. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   3. Yes: Mareklug ^talk 00:53, 19 April 2008 (UTC) (ChrisO states an elementary principle of Wikipedia -- articles report verifyiable information completely and impartially; the universities do make this claim, each one in its own way, to suppress this would be unethical encyclopedia writing)

      (@Cradel: please verify your position and remove this parenthetical note. --Mareklug ^talk 22:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC). Done, sorry about that

   4. Yes Cradel;
   5. Yes. The articles should not make the claim, that would be point of view. If the institutions make the claims, it can be mentioned and referenced by a reliable, independent source. – Kieran T ^(talk) 17:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   6. Apparently, yes, but it should also report why does the university consider itself to be legal heir. Nikola (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
6. University of Pristina as an historical article, covering the university up to 1999, linking to University of Prishtina for the post-1999 Albanian university and University of Priština Kosovska Mitrovica for the post-1999 Serbian university. (see next question for an alternative proposal, taking into account Nikola's comments)
   1. Yes: the pre-1999 university effectively no longer exists, so we need to cover its history and disambiguate to the two rival successor institutions. -- ChrisO (talk) 17:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   2. Yes: since the legal continuity of the pre-1999 university is, as far as I know, unclear, it should have its own article (or at least untill the successor issue has been cleared).Osli73 (talk) 19:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   3. No. While this article could be split into three in this way, the names aren't appropriate as I said above. Nikola (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   4. No. UP was established in 1970 and never died out. Claims to its past do not question its legitimacy.--Getoar (talk) 21:08, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   5. No. --Andrija (talk) 21:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   6. No - this should redirect at University of Prishtina and that should contain a link to the serbian one at the top - Cradel 23:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
7. University of Priština Kosovska Mitrovica as the article covering the post-1999 university in Kosovska Mitrovica.
   1. Yes: that's what the Serbian university calls itself, and we avoid endorsing its claims to be the legitimate U of P. -- ChrisO (talk) 17:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   2. No. The Serbian university most certainly does not call itself that way, and everyone could verify that by going to [10] and reading "Welcome to University of Pristina". The fact that in the Flash logo, words "Kosovska Mitrovica" are written below "University of Pristina" does not mean that it is the university's name. Following the same logic we may go to [11] and conclude that the university should be called "Berkeley University of California". Nikola (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

      Here we go again. Nikola uses the Gazimestan speech strategy. --Noah30 (talk) 21:40, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

   3. No. --Andrija (talk) 21:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   4. No --Mareklug ^talk 22:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC) Because, it does not call itself that. It uses "Pristina" in English when calling itself, and idiomatically it would be "University of Pristina at Kosovska Mitrovica", according to proper English language usage when describing universities. Perhaps it could be "University of Pristina (Kosovska Mitrovica)", where the parenthetical part functions as Wikipedia disambiguation marker, not part of its name.
8. University of Priština (1970-1999) as an historical article, covering the university up to 1999, linking to University of Prishtina for the post-1999 Albanian university and University of Priština for the post-1999 Serbian university.
   1. Proposed as an alternative to question #6, bearing in mind Nikola's comments about the Serbian university's name. This follows the fundamental rule in WP:NPOV#Article naming that we name articles of institutions by the name which they call themselves or the English equivalents thereof. They call themselves "University of Prishtina" and "University of Priština" respectively in English; therefore WP:NPOV requires that the articles should be at those names. 1999 clearly represents a fundamental break in the university's history, and a three-way split at this point will avoid us violating NPOV by stating or implying that one or other of the rival universities is the legitimate successor of the pre-1999 U of P. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   2. No: It's far too likely that people looking for University of Prishtina will type in "University of Pristina" or "University of Priština". We can't expect the world to be hip to the nuances of spelling. All three spellings are listed in the article definition by our own article about the city, as variants used in English, which is true. So it's impossible to distiguish between these institutions only on how the "sh" sound is rendered (or obliterated). All three spellings refer to the same city, but each university is in a different city.
9. University of Priština as the article covering the post-1999 university in Kosovska Mitrovica.
   1. Proposed as an alternative to question #7, bearing in mind Nikola's comments about the Serbian university's name. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
   2. No ---Mareklug ^talk 22:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC) How a university calls itself is only one criterion of several. In ambiguous cases, Wikipedia uses parenthethical disambiguation in article titles, unless one of the articles is clearly the leading target, and in this case, the risk that someone is looking for "UP", the Prishtina-situated institution, but looking for it using any of the three allowed spelling variants of the Kosovan capital city's name, outweighs how the Serbian university situated in Kosovska Mitrovica calls itself, requiring parenthetical disambiguation of some sort.
   3. No'--Getoar (talk) 22:54, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
10. Make University of Prishtina a disambiguation page! Make University of Pristina and University of Priština redirects to it. Make each University its own page with the name of the city as disambig parenthetical marker. make all possible spelling variants and Albanian/Serbian city names as redirects to these (two) articles.
    1. No. Osli73 (talk) 12:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC) There are two universities who use different names in English. Instead, the disambiguation issue should be solved by including a header at the top of each article informing about the existence of the 'other' university.
    2. Yes. This handles the problem and does not depend on spelling of the city, which we know by now, has three variants in English alone. --Mareklug ^talk 23:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
    3. Yes - an alternative would be if University of Pristina is the disambig page - Cradel 23:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
    4. NOGetoar (talk) 19:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC) THE UNIVERSITY OF PRISHTINA IS LOCATED IN PRISHTINA AS FOUNDED IN 1970. THE SERBIAN INSTITUTION IS AN ILLEGAL ESTABLISHMENT THAT HAS NO LEGAL OR HISTORICAL RIGHT TO CLAIM THE NAME. YOU MUST REALIZE THAT THE UNIVERSITY OF PRISHTINA IS MUCH LARGER THAN THE SERBIAN ENTITY AND IS LOCATED IN THE SAME BUILDINGS AS IN 1970 AND THE CITY WITH THE SAME NAME. FURTHERMORE, THE UNIVERSITY HAS ALWAYS BEEN A MAINLY ALBANIAN INSTITUTION; ALL RECTORS HAVE BEEN ALBANIAN SO FAR AND THE NUMBER OF ALBANIAN STUDENTS HAS ALWAYS CONSTITUTED A MAJORITY. IF YOU ASK THE ALUMNI THEY WILL TELL YOU THAT THE UNIVERSITY OF PRISHTINA IS THE LEGAL UNIVERSITY ESTABLISHED IN 1970 AND NOT A PARALLEL INSTITUTION IN MITROVICA. YOU ALSO HAVE TO REALIZE THAT THE SERBS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN THE UNIVERSITY OF PRISHTINA, BUT THEY CHOSE NOT TO COOPERATE WITH THE KOSOVAR GOVERNMENT, WHICH HAS SOVEREIGNTY OVER KOSOVO, BUT TO CREATE THEIR OWN PARALLEL INSTITUTION IN THE NORTHERN PART OF MITROVICA.
    5. No. The city's name is not relevant to this discussion. Wikipedia's policy requires that we call institutions what they call themselves in English. There is no way around this, and NPOV is non-negotiable; options that violate NPOV aren't going to be implemented. -- ChrisO (talk) 06:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

       Followup to ChrisO: But they appear to call themselves the same thing (within a margin of spelling variation of one letter, reported as de facto in English references of this particular entity, according to its Wikipedia article definition). So, aren't they subject to parenthetical disambiguation, also per Wikipedia policy, as well as listing on a disambiguation page? Wouldn't my suggestion guarantee that all readers find the requisite articles they are seeking, however they searched for it, by concentrating the "UP" designation on a common page (for an alternative way to do that, see the proposal that follwows)? Isn't that what we want? Also, does this policy you refer to in bold letters require we move the city's airport to Prishtina International Airport (that's what it calls itself in English) and the city/municipality article page to Prishtina (that's what it calls itself in English)? --Mareklug ^talk 13:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

    6. Almost: make University of Priština a disambiguation page and make University of Pristina and University of Prishtina redirect to it. The rest is fine... Nikola (talk) 22:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
11. Make University of Prishtina the page containing the history and the all the content, neatly broken down into sections, where everybody has a chance to state their POV and history according to their own accounting. One article. Make alternative spellings (Pristina/Priština) mere redirects. Justification: There is only one university, which has bifurcated, and content POV forking is discouraged. Also, University of Prishtina is the main way the university is referred to and the article has to be under some one name. If the Serbian entity ever decides to pursue a separate identity altogether, we'll spin its content off to an independent article. But for now, clearly, they want to be University of Prishina/Pristina/Priština and it is not in their power to dictate how the article is named on Wikipedia. Decides prevalent use. This is assuming they continue to claim to be UP.
    1. No. Osli73 (talk) 12:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC) As the legal successor of the old pre 1999 University of Pristina is unclear (one uses its name and teachers and the other its campus) it is clearly appropriate to present it as a historical entity in a separate article. Of course, the two new universities must be mentioned in it.
    2. Yes. --Mareklug ^talk 01:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC) An alternative way of handling the intractable problem -- paint it with one brush; include all POVs in one article.
    3. No. Especially for the pre-1999 university, Prishtina is not the most common spelling. Nikola (talk) 22:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

---

Please sign with your tildes followed by a semicolon after either the Yes or No. RegardsOsli73 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC) The format has changed -- we list individually one editor per line. --Mareklug ^talk 01:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I added question #2. The name Pristina is the primary Wikipedia usage to refer to the Kosovar capital. The Serbian establishment is not located in the city and has a much smaller student body when compared to UP. For this and other historical and technical reasons, University of Prishtina is the prevalent and the official one.--Getoar (talk) 23:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

The official name of the Kosovar capital isn't really relevant in this context. The issue is what the institutions call themselves - in this case, we have two physically and organisationally separate bodies, each with different names. That's why I suggested splitting the article to cover the two institutions separately, since they have no real relationship with each other apart from the claimed common heritage. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I was a bit unclear on point no. 5 above. I've now changed the wording to say what I meant. ChrisO and Mareklug, could you please reconsider your votes given the new wording. Osli73 (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Still doesn't work for me, I'm afraid. Neither article should endorse the claim to be the legitimate U of P, but both articles will need to describe the rival universities' claims. I'd suggest that you change the wording to something like "Neither article endorses any claim..." -- ChrisO (talk) 17:36, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for changing the wording, I've modified my "vote" accordingly. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I have to add that I don't see the above poll as covering all the options. First, it should ask whether this article should be split; then how should the articles made from it be named; and only then how should we redirect other potential names. Nikola (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

And right now, I just don't see it make any sense at all. It's a sea of mutually overlapping options, mostly without connections to each other or the common sense. Nikola (talk) 22:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

New proposal

I agree with Nikola regarding the blurriness of the poll and the lack of an adequate decision. Therefore, I would urge everyone to consider a compromise packet (I have relied heavily on seemingly popular and plausible ideas of the poll/discussion):

1. University of Prishtina to be reverted to its earlier version to represent the institution based in Prishtina
2. University of Pristina to redirect to the earlier as it clearly refers to the city where the university is located
3. The Serbian institution to be dedicated its own separate article, and I suggest University of Pristina, Mitrovica as a compromise name (see University of California, Berkley, University of California, Santa Barbara etc.)
4. A disambiguation to be offered at the beginning of both articles

I would truly appreciate cooperation since maintaining the status quo is not in the best interest of the Wikipedia community. Readers deserve accurate, unbiased and well-sourced material.--Getoar (talk) 06:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Getoar I disagree with you. University of Mitrovica has no right to use the name Univeristy of Prishtina/Unveristy of Pristina. --Noah30 (talk) 12:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but this could only be a compromise if it is applied as well to the Albanian university. And what will the two articles contain WRT the history of the university? Nikola (talk) 17:34, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Nikola, thank you for showing your inability to cooperate. I have gone too far, but you won’t move a bit. You have to consider several factors when settling a naming issue, but you won’t because of UP’s lead. I am really sorry to see that you can’t face the facts.--Getoar (talk) 00:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Which facts? Nikola (talk) 09:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

---

I would also suggest the following rationale in attempt to settle the dispute over legality.

The University of Prishtina is simply to be given superiority because:

• it is recognized as the University of Prishtina by the Kosovar government and many other institutions and organizations
• it is located where the name suggests
• inherits the same facilities that have been erected since 1970
• has a much larger student body
• has a much larger number of alumni who identify with it
• has been an overwhelmingly ethnic Albanian institution since 1970 (rectors and leaders have been Albanians)

The Serbian institution:

• was setup as a parallel institution in regards to the University of Prishtina
• is recognized by UNMIK as the University of Mitrovica
• inherits the Serbian part of faculty and alumni (they had controlled the campus in Prishtina during the 1990s when the Albanians were expelled by Milosevic’s regime)

--Getoar (talk) 05:57, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I support this proposal but as I wrote above the name of the univeristy in Mitrovica should be University of Mitrovica. --Noah30 (talk) 12:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Nonsense. The Albanian university is established as parallel institution to the University of Pristina after Serbia's constitutional changes. It is located in the former's facilities only because its staff were brutally expelled from them. Nikola (talk) 17:34, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

This is completely your own fabrication or to be more precise your interpretation of what the Serbian propaganda has to say. This is what they call a LIE! Serbs left themselves and when they were offered the change to join UP they turned it down because they did not want to cooperate with the Kosovar government. That's why the parallel institution in Mitrovica has no right to use the name UP. It is after all only an illegal establishment tolerated by the Kosovar government and UNMIK to avoid Serbian blatancy in the international scene.--Getoar (talk) 00:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

From the article:

After issuing of the Resolution 1244 and coming of KFOR most of the staff and students have fled from Kosovo in early June 1999[2]; by August 1999, only two months after the war's end, the Serbian population of Priština had fallen from 40,000 to under 1,000. [48]. Those who stayed were subjected to violence and forced out of the university buildings[2], most drastic examples being the murders of Professor Milenko Leković and staff members Miodrag Mladenović and Jovica Stamenković, who were kiled in June 23, 1999 in the very building of the Faculty of Economy [49] [50], as well as disappearance of Professor Tomanović and murders of Professor Bašić [51]and the husband of a professor of the Faculty of Physical Culture[2].

So, they haven't left themselves, and there are good reasons why they don't want what you call "cooperation". Nikola (talk) 09:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

---

Getoar, I do not agree with your proposal above. We should go by the Wikipedia policy of calling institutions what they call themselves. Based on this, there clearly are two universities

• University of Prishtina - the Albanian uni.
• University of Pristina - the Serbian uni. If you read the offical documents of the Serbian uni. (they're available on their website) you will see that they call themselves University of Pristina. Hence, "Mitrovica" does not appear to be part of its official name.
• To avoid confusion, I suggest each article carry a header outlining the existence of the other university.

RegardsOsli73 (talk) 07:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, Osli73, your distinction, hinging on ethnic spelling of the "sh" sound, is unworkable. Have you typed into Google "University of Pristina" (without quotes, to be exact) and looked at the results? Among many "University of Prishtina" results, you will see many intermixed "University of Pristina", all of which seem to be English-world references to the Albanian entity. Clearly, the world does not distinguish clearly between "Prishtina" and "Pristina", and apart from pages where "Pristina" may be thought of as a typo because "Prishtina" is used along in the same document, there are many, many results with "University of Pristina" as the only careful reference. In particular, every BBC reference is to "University of Pristina": [12] [13] [14]. And you heard of hte Fullbright Scholars? Here is an updated page of the Fullbright Scholar Program on study in Kosovo, and they don't even name the Mitrovica university at all, when summarizing the higher education in Kosovo (this is a recent summary, mentioning the declaration of independence). Link: [15]. Clearly, we need to disambiguate these two universities reliably, and both of my suggestions which you opposed (#10 and #11) would do so in various ways. But University of Pristina, University of Prishtina and University of Priština are used interchangably in the English World to mean the university physically located in the capital, and Wikipedia must reflect that view, not regulate it. If we can't come to an agreement on how to disambiguate separate pages, the current state of affairs is actually not terrible, and describes the situation rather faithfully. I'm sure we can improve the article text to make it better, but the basic framework already put in palce is serving the right purpose, even if imperfectly, and under a name that does not satisfy anyone, especially Kosovar Albanians. --Mareklug ^talk 15:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

And this is why I suggested University of Prishtina (Priština) and University of Pristina (Kosovska Mitrovica). But note that this still doesn't tell us what should the articles contain. Nikola (talk) 17:34, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Mareklug,

1. Googling is not an acceptable way of deciding on naming of articles. Many English language media will call the Albanian institution the University of Pristina because that is the Enlighs spelling of the city. However, for formal purposes, that is not its name.
2. I withold that Wikipedia policy dicatates that entities should be called by what name they use for themselves. In this case this is clearly University of Prishtina and University of Pristina. To avoid confusion we should clarify the distinction at the top of each article
3. It really shouldn't be that difficult. Both unniversities claim to be the University of Pristina/Prishtina and hence we need to either create a disambiguation page or create two different articles using the names which the universities use themselves.
4. If we can't agree, and that seems to be the case, then I suggest that we seek formal mediation.

Please respond to the above, especially no. 4. CheersOsli73 (talk) 21:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Mareklug, you are making a good point about the name issue, but we have to agree that the current version of the article is unprecedented, biased and presents the Serbian point of view rather than a neutral explanation of the situation.

Undeniably you are correct. I even added a POV template to the References section, to draw attention to the unequal representation of sources -- nearly all of them, prior to my addition of about 4, were and continue to source Serbian worldview. The history of hte article is predominantly cast as Serbian university's history. All this needs expansion and balancing. But it could be done inside this one article -- it's an option -- and my edits were a beginning of a NPOV restructuring and are largely intact as I write this. But I only edited the lead and the External links section. --Mareklug ^talk 00:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Osli73,

1. It is important that you understand Mareklug’s hint. He is not suggesting Google as an arbitrary measure in naming Wikipedia articles, but he is referring to a method of determining the use of the names in the English language. Certainly, Wikipedia follows this practice and this is why we have Priština (the more correct form of Pristina; š equals s in search engines) instead of Prishtina.
2. You have to consider my explanation why the University of Prishtina should be given primacy over the Serbian institution. Considering individual claims is pathetic and nonacademic. People have declared themselves kings and presidents, but Wikipedia would not call them so unless they are truly ruling.
3. I am fine with formal mediation. I will make sure I formally present the legality and legitimacy of the University of Prishtina in my efforts to comply with Wikipedia standards and offer our community more accurate information.

--Getoar (talk) 22:56, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

@Osli73: Of course, should the formal mediation become necessary, I won't avoid it, and will participate, but I would like us to spend a little more time making our thinking sharper and our positions clearer, as well as to possibly fix any logical mistakes. :) It will be helpful to delineate actual positions, not just that we did not agree.

For example, you can't offer an alternative of the sort you did in your Point #3: "Both unniversities claim to be the University of Pristina/Prishtina and hence we need to either create a disambiguation page or create two different articles using the names which the universities use themselves."

The above sentence is self-contradictory, as well as offers no choice. There is no option "either/or" where:

• one alternative is disambiguation page, or
• the other alternative is separate pages for the universities.

That's because a disambiguation page is a container that lists two or more alternatives, each one an article. Here, we would list at least two, where the two would be the separate physical unviersities. So that's no choice at all.

Second point: If both universities, as you just said, claim to be the <one thing>, then clearly they need to be <one article describing everything in turn> or they are <one thing> (1st unique disambiguation marker) and <one thing>(2nd unique disambiguation marker).

Observed spelling variance in English language references strongly advocates for redirecting all possible spelling variants to common destinations, not making spelling nuances discriminating entities in and of themselves. That is why I brought in evidence from the World Wide Web.

I hope you agree on formal grounds with what I just wrote. Without deciding on content. It is this sort of discussion we need to have b efore we ask someone to help us. I would also like to point out that in our midst is admin user:ChrisO, who has authored the Kosovo naming (proposed) policy for the Manual of Style, and has previously authored other such policies. We should get him to participate even more, as well as get him to answer our questions while we have this expertise available. This is not to say that ChrisO is above making wrong assessments, or chainging his considered opinion. :) Best wishes, --Mareklug ^talk 23:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Marek and others, I would like you to consider this version [16] in reference to the University of Prishtina. The addition of a disambiguation header referring to the Serbian institution would be appropriate. As you can see I have also authored pictures for the university's history section, whose length is comparable to those about the University of Vienna and the University of Texas at Austin. In fact, the article on UV served me as a template as I was writing the article. Of course, the addition of other sources and information would be indispensable.

And please, consider the size factor when deciding about the name: UP has more students, faculty, alumni etc. (see above for more). Also, bear in mind the fact that the Kosovar government and UNMIK are the legal and legitimate authority in Kosovo.

I would like Marek's opinion about my above-stated proposal.--Getoar (talk) 01:05, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

We are moving too slowly, simply because certain users here do not prefer neutrality. They prefer the fabrications of Serbian propaganda. Please!--Getoar (talk) 00:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps the wiser course of action, at least for now, would be to incorporate the version you link to above (and which has been removed as a content fork by the admins) into the main body of the current article, ignoring for now the fact that it is lodged under the wrong title from your point of view (just like the international airport, might I add). This will improve the visible article by making it contain alternative accounts of history, notable alumni, summer school and so on. As to us considering "the size factor", I think that's irrelevent -- very small institutions can be world-important. University of Chicago has only 2k undergraduates. And, unfortunately, the legal and legitimate authority over Kosovo is a matter of political disagreement internationally, and we can't hope to adjudicate that matter here, only describe it, and describe other things. I know that this is not exactly the reply you wished for, but it suggests the most constructive path of article improvement I can think of, given the ongoing contesting by editors holding various viewpoints. And we still are deciding whether there will be one or more articles for this item. --Mareklug ^talk 03:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Mareklug: Sorry if I was a bit unclear on point 3 of my suggestion above. Let me try to set out my train of thought again:

1. There are two universities, both using the name University of Pristina/Prishtina, although with slightly different spelling.
2. As far as I know, neither of them is laying claim to being more 'real' than the other university - they are two different institutions (kind of like West Germany and East Germany, back in the days). One, of course, is financed by the Government of Serbia while the other is financed by the Government of Kosovo (and, hence, UNMIK). Therefore, there is no reason for editors of either article to claim that 'their' university is somehow the internationally "recognized" institution in the way that a country can be recognized.
3. Each of these two universities deserves a separate article.
4. To avoid confusion I suggest that we either

• • allow each university to have its own article using its own spelling of its name (ie Pristina or Prishtina); or
  • we redirect all spelling variants of the name to a disambiguation article where we simply explain that there are two different universities and provide links to them, pref. naming the articles: University of Pristhina (in Pristina) and University of Pristina (in Mitrovica) or University of Prishtina (Albanian) and University of Pristina (Serbian)

1. Either way, but especially if we go for the first option above, we need to have a header in each respective article informing about the existence of the other university so as to avoid confusion.

I'm just trying to find what I believe is a neutral and logical solution. CheersOsli73 (talk) 08:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply to Osli73's no. 2 above: According to 1244 UN through UNMIK have control over Kosovo. UNMIK recognizes University of Prishtina as a successor of University of Prishtina/Pristina. The university in Mitrovica is recognized by UNMIK as University of Mitrovica which means University of Prishtina is the legal institution according to international law. Based on resolution 1244 "University of Pristina" in Mitrovica is illegal. I would also like to remind you that University of Prishtina in Prishtina uses "Pristina" as part of their official name in Serbian language. We should have two articles, one University of Prishtina (the real university) and another University of Mitrovica (the Serbian university). The university of Prishtina can only be in Prishtina and not in Mitrovica. University of Stockholm can only be in Stockholm and not for example in Skane. --Noah30 (talk) 15:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply to Osli73's no. 3 above: Yes but under different names --Noah30 (talk) 15:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

1. It is irrelevant what UNMIK calls these universities just as it is irrelvant what Serbia calls them. Neither of them needs to be 'recognized' by either to exist. What is important is what they call themselves, and both obviously call themselves the University of Pristina / Prishtina.
2. good that you agree that each uni. deserves its own article, naturally this will be with different names. I am suggesting the name using their own spelling and, possibly, with the location or ethnicity within parethesis.

CheersOsli73 (talk) 19:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I consider that University of Prishtina and University of Pristina are the same name. I believe the most correct solution to this is to have two articles: University of Prishtian/Pristina and University of Mitrovica. If no other solution is found, with big reservations I support Getoar's last proposal but his proposal is the last compomise I can accept. --Noah30 (talk) 19:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Osli, your point #2 is wrong, both universities claim to be the "real" one. If we split the articles, whatever the names, we still don't know where will pre-1999 history go. Nikola (talk) 09:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Noah30,

1. yes, Pristina and Prishtina are almost the same name, which is why we are having these problems. However, the solution is not to give one of them a different name. The solution is to either redirect both to a disambiguation name and then create two articles with the ethnicity or location of the university in parentethis (ie University of Prishtina (Pristina) alt. University of Prishtina (Albanian) and University of Pristina (Mitrovica) alt. University of Pristina (Serbian)) or to create two articles using the different spelling variations (University of Prishtina and University of Pristina) but with clear information regarding the existence of the other university.
2. I'm not exactly sure what Getoar's 'compromise' is. If, as I understand it, he is suggesting that we redirect University of Pristian and University of Prishtina to the Albanian University of Prishtina and then call the Serbian institution University of Pristina at Mitrovica alt. University of Pristina, Mitrovica, then I don't agree. The analogy with the University of California is incorrect. First of all, these universities actually call themselves University of California Berkley. Second, to my understanding they are just different campuses of the University of California, which is not the case with these two insitutions we are discussing here. Finally, there isn't one main institution called University of California with rival local universities.
3. Please consider my proposed solution (see point 1 above). Otherwise, I do think we are ready to seek formal mediation.

CheersOsli73 (talk) 15:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Nikola, my understanding is that while both institutions use the name University of Pristina/Prishtina neither of thems is 'denying' the existence of the other university. They are just two different institutions with the same/similar names. CheersOsli73 (talk) 15:20, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. Nikola (talk) 13:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

request for mediation?

I don't believe we are getting anywhere here and think we should request mediation. Any final thoughts? CheersOsli73 (talk) 15:34, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

After all the discussion above I can't understand why no one has any comments to mediation. Anyone feel like presenting this for mediation? CheersOsli73 (talk) 19:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

It would be helpful to list the purported positions you wish to have mediated, as those remain unfocused. I, for one, can continue to work on the article in its present form, refining its content, or have it broken into two or even three articles. Neither am I wedded to any one naming scheme, so at least from my point of view, we have not reached a stalemate. Mediators like to deal with clear alternatives. We can't hope to have one set of editors impose a solution on another set. In the end, everyone is building consensus, and the editors already involved at least may be considered to be acquainted with all the nuances, and the brunt of clarifying what if anything requires mediation rests on them – us. --Mareklug ^talk 04:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not very familiar with the mediation process. Just do your best. Nikola (talk) 18:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Massive copyedit and attempt to address official name use while disambiguating. Please add missing content

As you can see, I thoroughly reworked the existing text, attempting to make it as neutral as I could, preserving actual official names, while disambiguating by means of location and language of instruction. I also fixed many mistakes and unified dates in references and in text, and added missing attributes to cite news/cite web templates, and unified typography and punctuation per MOS, with superscripts following commas and periods and semicolons, as is customary in the English language. And I preserved official institutional names.

Having dones all that, I took the liberrty to remove the POV template from the article top, because I believe that the neutrality of the article has been restored as far as the already present content. This specifically means that the missing Albanian viewpoint on history that was lodged in the (deleted by admins) content fork University of Prishtina should be incorporated reasonably into this article.

Also, I left the POV-section template on the references, since the reference count is still predominantly Yugoslavian/Serbian in nature. This needs balancing.

I attempted to contextually spell Prishtina/Pristina/Priština as well as Mitrovica, Kosovo/Kosovska Mitrovica contextually, employing all spellings, as needed, and alternating them. I hope you appreciate my trying to be as impartial as possible.

I believe it is possible to keep this issue represented within a single article, but of course, much more work needs to be done, and missing material needs to be added. I made sure that recently edit warred items were rephrased neutrally.

The issue of article name I left as unresolved, but I tried to alternate content, so that neutral order would arise on average.

Perhaps we can still avoid mediation, and simply prepare the best impartial, encyclopedic entry for this phenomenon. Perhaps we might be able to succeed in unifying its various aspects and descriptions, which in turn might give Kosovo some hope, that its state institution of higher learning itself will at last reunify at some future time into a cohesive whole. Peace. --Mareklug ^talk 02:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)