Welcome!

Hello, Davu.leon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Again, welcome! Mieciu K 20:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

welcome

Dear Davu,

Welcome to Wikipedia! As a new editor you are more than welcome to make edits to all pages, although some articles might be locked for a few days after registration (like Kosovo maybe, I am not sure). Don't be afraid to edit articles, but in case of controversial subjects it is always wise to check the talk page first and discuss any major or prominent edits. Given your interest in Kosovo subject, you will probably encounter a lot of heated debates. Happy editing! --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 11:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Davu

If you wish to make a statement with your views on the matter (for the arbitration purposes) please do so on the here [[1]]. Your comments will be greatly appreciated.

You can also make a personal statement along with any evidence you want to put forward. Don't worry too much about the formatting as I will sort that out. I have been quite busy recently but I will present my case very soon. Hopefully other Editors who think the same as us will join us soon, as we don't want this admin-backed propaganda to misrepresent the reality.

Thanks again Tonycdp 09:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration on Kosovo

Dear Davu,

I just wanted to point your attention to the recent Arbitration case (Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo) that opened on the Kosovo and related articles. You are not part of the arbitration, but since you have been editing the article's talk page recently and have been editing related articles (e.g. Kosovo War), you might want to read up on the Arbitration case (and, if you feel like that, give us your opinion). That way you also get an idea of what the problems have been in the past and you can consider those issues in your future edits and comments. Best regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 15:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo again...

Hi Davu... I'm afraid you're way off the mark in your comment on my talk page that "The idea that independence for Kosovo will set some sort of a precedent for other disputed territories is a regurgitation of Serbian Government propaganda, pure and simple." Not at all; it's a Russian issue, not a Serbian one. The Russians have been hinting for months that they don't see any difference in principle between Kosovo and disputed territories in the former Soviet Union. Putin's gone on the record just today to say exactly this, and has said that Russia may veto an agreement on Kosovo if it doesn't like what it sees. (See [2]). Don't read this as a definite statement of intent, by the way. It's likely that Putin is seeking to use Kosovo as leverage to persuade the West to commit to holding some kind of final status talks for South Ossetia and Abkhazia. -- ChrisO 17:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting point from a US-based academic commenting in the left-leaning UK newspaper the Guardian:

'You suggest (Leaders, October 31) Serbian foolishness in not giving up Kosovo. To Serbs, Kosovo is an integral part of Serbia, legitimised by the London agreement of 1916 and by UN security council resolution 1244 of 2001. Kosovo is also the historical, religious and emotional heartland of Serbia. The change from a Serb to an Albanian majority does not change its historical, legal and political status. Serbia's claim to Kosovo is no different from Russia's claim to Chechnya, China's to Xinjiang, India's to Kashmir, Thailand's to Panni Marathiwad and Philippines to Mindanao - all Muslim majority provinces in non-Muslim majority states where violence for independence has taken place for decades. The Serb majority of the Krajina region in Croatia broke away and declared independence. They were not recognised. The Krajina Serbs have all been driven out of Croatia in the largest ethnic cleansing of the Yugoslav wars. Republika Srpska has been denied independence from Bosnia. As long as the independence of these provinces are denied, Kosovo has no special right to independence either. Serbia must not be treated differently.' Professor George Thomas Marquette University, Wisconsin, USA [3]

Not saying we should agree with him or not, but it's the first time I've seen someone bring together parallels with other sub-national entities seeking independence. I'm sure Serbia wouldn't want to be compared to Russian or Chinese policies as regards 'separatist' areas, but Thailand the Philippines are (relatively) moderate countries who would also work hard to prevent a UN consensus on Kosovo independence, should a UDI occur. Just a thought! JamesAVD 14:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

getting things right

Hello Davu. Your creative quoting worked just fine: my laugh was genuine. :-) Sometimes I will say "unnecessary" things that seem obvious to anyone, such as the meaning of Wales' phrase; I do it to help other potential readers who haven't followed the whole course of the exchange.

In my talk page you pointed out the main problem of a wiki encyclopaedia: who determines what's right, what is the truth? The solution was to simply avoid the problem altogether, with the idea of "Verifiability, not truth". So, instead of actively describing a subject, we just passively reflect how most reliable sources describe it, even if all those sources got its facts wrong. The rationale for this is explained in "Why original research is excluded".

Sometimes the experts who write our reliable sources are divided on a subject, and the proper way to reflect those conflicting views in a Wikipedia article could be difficult to find. But this is not the case of Kosovo's current status, on which our reliable sources are unanimous (see Talk:Kosovo/Sources).

The so-called "pro-Serb" editors in this article (including ChrisO) are very willing to discuss compromise, and have repeatedly done so, but only within the limits established by Wikipedia policies: using reliable and verifiable sources, excluding original research. These principles should not be sacrificed to avoid hurting the sensibilities of Albanians, Serbs or any other group.

If you read Talk:Kosovo and Talk:Kosovo/Archive 10, or Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo, you'll find that it's been mostly the "pro-Albanians" who have consistently tried to present their personal views without providing any reliable source to back it. ChrisO is not being "pro-Serb", or "pro-anything" for that matter: he's simply upholding Wikipedia policies (the ones that every editor agrees to when creating an account).

I'm Argentinian :-) but I'm not demanding to describe the Falkland Islands as "a contested territory under British occupation", because that's not how the vast majority of reliable sources present the facts (and because of common sense).

In fact, a good article, an article that accuratedly presents the current consensus of scholars or experts working on that particular topic should be offensive to those who profoundly dislike the current consensus. An article on the Falklands that makes Argentinian nationalists happy is most likely VERY wrong :-) Best regards. Evv 03:09, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I replied in my talk page. - Best regards, Evv 06:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I replied in my talk page. - Best regards, Evv 19:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suits..

..in a bad or good way? --PaxEquilibrium 19:12, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

..why won't you answer me? --PaxEquilibrium 19:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answered on your talk page, sorry. Davu.leon 12:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am most delighted to hear Your positive opinions ;), but I asure You - it's not that appliable. My old nick "HRE" could be understood that it suits me best in a good way or in a bad way - but AFAIC, I am neither that good - nor am I that bad. It is simple as that - an error of judgement, very simply caused by my nick-selection. :)) --PaxEquilibrium 18:41, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't get me wrong - please, see my reply on Talk:Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium 18:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is a talk page - and why wouldn't that be the right place to post compliments? Thanks for the kinds words, I am most delighted by your kind words - you've made my day (whoops! I meant you made my night ;). I just don't really understand what do you mean by supporting Serbian policy. For instance, if you think that I somehow support the Serbian political leadership, I'm afraid that I will have to say that I don't see where/how/why. I would gladly like to hear with which viewpoints of mine do You disagree. Considering that the final status has to/will be a compromise, I don't think how can anyone be angered by compromise (except for the Serbian conservative traditionalist nationalist followers of the "Miloshevich aide" or the romantic "Dardan" Albanian nationalists in Kosovo). I can guarantee that there will be virtual fighting or reverting from my side - has there been in the past? ;).

Cheers mate, and thanks again for your warm words. --PaxEquilibrium 22:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this has only to do with the fact that I live in Serbia's capital, Belgrade. As will the Point-of-View of a most neutralist Wikipedian from Zagreb (regardless of ethnicity, of course), lie with Croatia - however, I do not think that it's that obvious. Since it obviously is, please tell me where so that I repair myself.

With full heart, --PaxEquilibrium 17:40, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Davu.leon

See Talk:Kosovo for answear. - Litany 19:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo's Final Status

Do not make assumptions on how discussions will end. The talks have taken a twist with Serbia's new constitution and Russia and China almost certain to veto any imposed solution at the security council. It is far from a guarantee that Kosovo will become independent. Let the talks play out before commenting on how it will end. MK013 07:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Davu. I've been commenting on the Kosovo article for a couple of years, formerly as (JD) when I had no Wikipedia account - check out the archives. I agree that a UDI is the most likely outcome here and the UN will be unable to force Serbia to agree; I also agree that there's a good chance the US will support (as long as the K Albanians play it well); but I think that there will be many (and not just Russia) who will not recognise Kosovo; if the RS threaten their own UDI the international community will be strongly motivated to prevent Kosovo independence. Ultimately what I'm saying is that if the talks fail and UDI is declared the outcome is somewhat unpredictable.

Personally (call me an optimist) I think it <would> be possible to reach an agreement with the Kosovo Serbs to support or acquiese in independence if more returns were facilitated and more power given to local Serb-dominated areas, assuming all that lead to a calmer security situation.

I think we need to note that many (incl. Martti Ahtisaari) think that talks might fail and (cf. Ceku, yourself) that UDI would be the likely outcome. I think I can get a consensus on that. Good to talk to you! JamesAVD 14:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, amused me briefly that typo - dangerous double meaning! Not to say, of course, that there aren't a whole range of positive and negative reasons for pushing certain positions, or for using certain lobbying tactics, from every side... JamesAVD 15:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, what's the documentary you're researching for? JamesAVD 15:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

I would be happy to help you upload the picture.You got a link for the picture?Ferick 03:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC) Never mind. Looks like you did it already.[reply]

Question

Please, have a say in here. It doesn't matter if you don't really think you have a full-scale solution.

Also, I would like to hear the general Kosovar opinion on Kosovo's independent statehood (if you're in Kosovo or just from Kosovo; ignore the latter question if you're not). I would like to know, because I heard several (pro-Serb) UN experts who claimed that Kosovo's independence has no grounds in International Law, no historical, political or any sorts of grounds for a basis for statehood. As this one side, I would gladly like to hear the other. Cheers and with heart my friend, --PaxEquilibrium 17:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that's bad... but don't forget to not forget about me! :D

Well... Belgrade isn't really that nice a city... with two million people everywhere, most classify is a not-so-good-one. Oh.. I'm not discouraging you to come. AFAIC, perhaps I could meed you (I'm in Belgrade... in a way..)?

Irish and in Pristina... why do I have a feeling that that's familiar... (TV, news or something?) --PaxEquilibrium 17:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I would never ever do such a thing. If I would, I would have done it - but I didn't. If someone barges into my house and threatens to push me out of my home, or even kill - I will not kill him. Nor will I "take up arms" (betraying my beliefs) and become everything that I have been fighting against and everything I stand against. But NO. I left. And I consider myself actually "superior" to all those who attacked me ("us", if there is any) and all those who remained and went to resort to violence do allegedly "defend themselves". I did not "ran away crying from a battlefield". I went full of pride, knowing that I did the good thing. Many consider me a coward, and say that my current miserable life as a war refugee is the result of it - but I have in truth, acted far more honorable than... at least 1,000,000 (if not more) of my countrymen. For if I stayed - I would've lost my life, or lost my soul - for the moment that I would fire a gun (regardless to where is it pointed) - my very point of existence would have died forever, never to be resurrected; with that single shot.

::I am far better today, alive and with a happy conscience, thank You. Then again, I am one, and I am a special case (but heck, isn't everyone and everything?). Best wishes, --PaxEquilibrium 19:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map

Hey thanks for the link, it is indeed my map. Funny to see they used it on B92. Officially they are supposed to state they got it from Wikimedia I suppose, but I thinks its kinda cool they used it :). Regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 15:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know

..I got an e-mail from an anon saying you're a sock-puppet.

Just thought you should know. --PaxEquilibrium 10:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No allegation written about that.

He/she only informs me to use my "investigation powers" (I have received quite a reputation of a sock-buster, probably because of that) and "..root you out.." (a liberal translation from Serbian).

I replied asking identification and more details, but never got a response. --PaxEquilibrium 18:49, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need. First of all, I don't need thorow investigations to know if someone is a sock-puppet - I know it at once. Just as I know it now that you're not a sock (however there's always a possibility that I never met your sock-puppeteer ;). Cheers. --PaxEquilibrium 19:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"researching a documentary"

What will your documentary involve, can you use additional sources and assistance? Is there a specific position that you are touting? Maybe we can talk?Juda S. Engelmayer 15:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No Lunatic Comments

Hi there, please be sensitive on the kosovo page, refering to other editors work as 'lunatic' is only one step away from directly calling that editor a lunatic. I will defend you from the same abuse if you are getting it. Keep up the interest your contributions are essential. I'm sure you'll agree ,the best editors are those that keep their cool...Cheers Buffadren 13:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On Kosovo

More than 500,000 families, mainly Albanians, as a result of fighting between Serbian and KLA forces and also as the result of expulsions instigated by the Serbian security forces and associated paramilitary militias. .... ? This sentence makes no sense. What about the families? Davu.leon 02:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Er, sorry about that. I added some verbs. Thanks for noticing. 8) -- Beland 02:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorism

You said UCK were not terrorists. Well perhaps they weren't after 1998, like I already said - but even Rugova said that "the Albanian people has nothing to do with those terrorists", when on one occasion Milosevic's stereotypic machinery wanted to bad-present the Albanian ethnic population through the image of the KLA. --PaxEquilibrium 16:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JNA committed terror in Vukovar & Dubrovnik - but I cannot classify it as a terrorist organization since it's a state-official organization Army, and not a guerrilla militarist group. I agree that the original IRA can't be simply a "terrorist group", but that IRA can only be compared to the post-1998 KLA (whereas the pre-/original KLA is similar to the most recent IRA). Occasions when whole nations arise in National Liberation wars such as Scotland, the United States or the Partisans in World War II are different from the Basques, Palestinians or Irish (riots and rebellions). That's why the Serbian rebellion in Croatia in the first half of the 1990s isn't "terrorist" with their Territorial defense force; they had full control over the whole of their self-proclaimed territory (same is when Slovenia and Croatia were seceding Yugoslavia) [the heavy atrocities and terror they conduct sadly, do not count as terrorism]. But in Kosovo's case, the Serbian/Yugoslav armed forces have kept the majority of the territory under firm occupation, and KLA was a tiny group of people firstly initiated under the ideal of an extremist Marxist-Leninist left (in its early stages).

Racak and Klecka

So you've been to Northern Kosovo and spoken to KLA people? Yet you've never seen a KLA agent with a beard even though some of their top spokesmen were Saudi or Afghani during the 1999 Sky News broadcasts, in uniform, direct from the Albania/Kosovo border, "as we are going in to take those Serbian positions". Well if you know the KLA, then you'll know a saying "Blood calls for Blood, you start a war". And this is what you do. Let's talk fact, you're not interested in Kosovo are you? You're either an Albanian posing as an investigator or a sadly misinformed outsider. Only you know which of the two you are. You see, the fact is, the masses from Britain and America don't know Klecka, many have heard of Racak but how many have heard of Klecka? If your sources and their authors were so confident that this was all a fabrication, why is never any mention of it anywhere? You know as well as I do that in 1999, too much focus on the activities of the KLA would have upset the balance; people like you (assuming you're the westerner) like to have their ear tickled by fairytale stories of aggresive militaries harming innocent people, but if and when it is known that those individuals are not so innocent in intent, that they too have caused aggrivation; it starts to look more like Indonesia where the government was never internationally condemned over the 26 years of bloodshed in Aceh, because at various stages of the conflicts, all angles were covered. You said to Pax that the KLA are not terrorists but more like the original IRA. You can fool an ignorant American with nonsensical statistics, but every toothless simpleton in Africa, Asia, South America, Eastern Europe and the Pacific knows that one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist; one man's opressor is another man's liberator; one man's war hero is another man's war criminal; one man's ally is another man's enemy; one man's peacekeeper is another man's invader, and so forth, the list grows. When a non-governmental body takes up arms, you can call them whatever you like, but don't look for words like "compassionate" or "righteous". "It doesn't matter if you're left or to your right, don't try to hide behind the cause, for which you fight!" - sound familiar? As for your sources not being equal, that is absolutely true when one doesn't like what he is reading from another source. You have decided that you don't like the sound of pro-Serb/anti-Albanian sentiment, which is odd, as even a number of once avid US/UK peacekeepers were were accidently "exposed" to information which their governments never wanted them to see, finally saw that there was more to the Kosovo crisis than met the eye. Nobody withdrew their condemnation for the Yugoslav activities, but they did see them in more light and start to realise why they did some of the things which they did, whilst acknowledging that the Alanians too cause and did cause horrific acts. If every incident and dare I say, allegation, was reported piece by piece from the beginning, the public would have had a different perception. Your pro-Albanian stories regarding Kosovo (having looked at what you call sources) all come from Albanian accounts or reports/declarations made by journalists/officials who are close to their resepctive governments and these in turn are those of the 14 Nato countries who attacked Yugoslavia or close friends of theirs/US puppet states. Don't lie to yourself that free media means that everything they say is true. If they are so free, then what is stopping them telling lies? Don't give me "oh but they don't need to" coblers, because they decided to get involved in the first place, which means that they knew what they were interested in. Nick Hawton makes so many factual errors that even a beginner cannot trust him, yet he to this day comments on Serb aggression and Albanian pre-1999 innocence. Equally, just because a media may be state-controlled, does that automaticly suggest that they are lying? Just supposing, an event which took place worked in favour of the state? Do these things never happen? The Milosevic news networks reported over 700 missing Serbs from Kosovo all kidnapped since the KFOR takeover. I suppose that that is all fabricated. Only one way to tell: Milosevic is ousted, within six months, the new "free Serbian media" publish reports that this figure is now 1,300, as for 2007? It has risen even higher. I suppose that the Serbian media is still SPS controlled? Wouldn't you say? 1,300 eh? What are these compassionate drug-dealers with false beards doing with them Mr.Davu? Teaching them History of Art? Come on, wake up and smell the roses. I don't deny Serbian atrocity in Kosovo, but I know a lot of things that you don't: you havn't heard the beginning from me yet. At the end of our dispute, it will be Check Mate because only I know the argument which awaits you, the one which you would never say these things about if you really knew. Evlekis 08:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, yes I have been to Kosovo, countless times, and all over it; but not since 1998. On personal principle, I won't enter the region now but I've since been all around it. Some things don't need to be sourced here. You don't need evidence that Tony Blair has eaten and drank for the past sixteen years as his being alive stands testimony to the fact that he has been fed. The rest of the situation on the Balkan is down to those who can read into politics. But let's not play games with each other. You, my friend, are Albanian arn't you? Be honest with me. I have three reasons to suspect that you are Albanian, not a former peacekeeper. The question is, how did your English get so good? My opinion is that your parents are Albanian and you are from America or somewhere. Prej nga jeni? Evlekis 19:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh you're Irish. No, I hate nobody and I don't judge people by their backgrounds. That is fair. Never mind the three reasons, I'll take your word for it. Listen friend, you may be a film maker but it seems to me that your mind is already made up. I hope you win an oscar for your film. It's already fictional, that is clear. Everything commited by Albanians against Serbs was staged so that Serbs could have an excuse to expel or kill them; everything committed against the Albanians was real, they wouldn't need to stage something. According to you, Albanians of Kosovo were innocent good Yugoslav citizens whose ship sunk when a nasty vile dictator came to power; spare it Davu, we've seen it a million times every time CNN have sent back reports. Whom do you think you're going to convince Davu? The supporters of pro-west govenments and Albanian interests will believe you if you tell them that about a non-existent village destroyed by Serbs, they won't consult a map to see where it is, it tickles their ear; try it, have a bit of fun, see if you get come backs for the Kosovska Palanka massacre of 632 women and children trying to escape gunfire by Serbs. The only claims that the village doesn't exist will come fom Serbs, who you know them, still influenced by a state-controlled media, they are obviously lying. But do you really think that one of your less suspecting colleagues will say to you "Yes, we know Racak happened, Klecka didn't, but I still question Kosovska Palanka, well, it's not the killing itself, it's just....where is it? I've never heard of it!". Well let's just say that Kosovska Palanka is four km n.w of Prizren. The suckers who like your film won't dare to question it. Evlekis 19:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All right, we'll keep it civilised. I can't write any more this evening, I have a job to go to. I am close to victims there however; I may even be able to help you. We need to start again, from the beginning, cards down, and step by step, item by item go through the whole crisis, using links too. Have a good night. Evlekis 20:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You Reverted My edit on Kosovo

You reverted my edit on Kosovo. I have taken the 'disputed' edit to the Talk Page where I have asked for the opinions of others. I am notifying you so you can add to and expand your comments or indeed change your edit. Thanks.

Here is the text you reverted, I object to the use of the word BITTERLY and suggest STRONGLY instead.

Inter-ethnic tensions continued to worsen in Kosovo throughout the 1980s. In particular, Kosovo's ethnic Serb community, a minority of Kosovo population, complained bitterly about mistreatment from the Albanian majority

Hope I can convince you....cheerio Buffa. Buffadren 14:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks , good grace shown Buffadren 09:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haradinaj

Print sources are indeed allowed in Wikipedia, but it should be clear from the reference where in the print source the relevant information can be found. And if the only source for a claim is an autobiography, it should be treated with extreme caution. A ecis^Brievenbus 23:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to find a different source for every single "citation needed" tag. One source is ok, but some more would be preferrable. The relevant point here is verifiability. Something may be obvious to you, as I see that you are making a documentary on Kosovo. But it may not be obvious to someone from Taiwan or Lesotho visiting this website.

The problem with autobiographies, semi-autobiographies and interviews is the risk of mythmaking lurking around the corner. The story of Haradinaj's killed brother for instance is very poetic, but that's exactly the reason why we should be very careful. It must be verifiable. If it can't be verified by independent outside sources, it can't be included. Per Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons: "We must get the article right. Be very firm about high quality references, particularly about details of personal lives. Unsourced or poorly sourced controversial (negative, positive, or just highly questionable) material about living persons should be removed immediately from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, and user pages. ... Editors should remove any controversial material about living persons that is either unsourced, relies upon sources that do not meet standards specified in Wikipedia:Reliable sources, or is a conjectural interpretation of a source." And per Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Exceptional claims require exceptional sources: "Exceptional claims should be supported by multiple credible and verifiable sources, especially with regard to historical events, politically-charged issues, and biographies of living people."

For information on how to cite one source several times in the article (for instance the Biden reference), see Wikipedia:Footnotes#Citing a footnote more than once. A ecis^Brievenbus 00:07, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The poetic nature of it is simply a reason to be cautious, but it's never a reason to dismiss it altogether. If it can be verified from independent sources that this has indeed occurred, it can obviously be included with the proper referencing. The gist of what I've said above is simply that information on Wikipedia should be sourced. A ecis^Brievenbus 00:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I'm a journalist myself. I hate not being able to make things up as I go ;) A ecis^Brievenbus 00:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

!!! YOU STUPID EVIL SERB!!!

I'm Irish, actually, though I live in Pristina. But who are you? Davu.leon 22:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An Irish Chetnik. Interesting....

Sure, I'm a Chetnik. But who are you? Davu.leon 22:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore him. Thank you for all your good hard work and contributions and for everything you do to help establish full facts about Kosova. Kosova is Albanian, always has been, always must be forever. I lost family members in Barakovo massacre and i HATE every Serb on the planet. I believe you are irish. Forget what fascists tell you. Good work! Barbaric 13:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, although I must say that while I can understand your feelings, I don't think anyone should hate every Serb on the planet. There are good Serbs who know and hate what their country did in Kosova, unfortunately there just aren't many of them in Government, or for that matter, on Wikipedia. I will continue to do my best to help Wikipedia show the truth about what Serbia did in Kosova, both before and during the war, but I will welcome any Serb who is prepared to admit that truth. I'm not saying you should be nice to Serbs, or even like them, but maybe one day one of them will be able to show you that they are not all bad. I agree with you though, that Kosova is and must be Albanian. There can never be a return to Serb rule. Thanks again for your words. Davu.leon 22:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem like a man who knows his business. I am sorry I cannot agree with you about Serbs. They took five of my brothers ands three of my half-brothers so I hate every last one of them. Never mind that for time being. Please have a word with Jordovan, he is sure that Barakovo massacre was not real killing and that the number was 20, he is using Srpska Mreza for sourse and it is full of Serbian shit. My sources come from CNN and international community. You must know it was more than 60, even Joschka Fishcer said it was. Please tell Jorodvan. Barbaric 16:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Irish in Pristina?

An Irishman doing in Pristina ? Buffadren 16:23, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem at all with you, just curious that's all. but I see you did RV me last night , the idea to put A before S on the intro was mine. It was for alphabetic reason only. Buffadren 10:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly I don't care which goes first right now; in a few months Albanian will be the first official language of Kosova, and a whole lot of changes will be made to the page. Unfortunately this will probably start up another edit war, but the page should still be under probation by then, so hopefully it can be kept under some kind of control. I only reverted you because I liked the description 'mountainous', and because I generally revert edits to the intro that haven't been discussed first; there's been a lot of discussion on how to get that particular piece to where it is now. I see you went ahead and removed it anyway. I won't revert again, it was more a way of registering mild preference to keep the word than something I feel the need to make a stand on. Davu.leon 12:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shqiptar jeni apo? Qa u gzova kur e pash se edhe ti je ketu. Hej kqyre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ra%C4%8Dak_incident#The_article_is_POV per masakren e Racakut si une e kam vendos ne artikull. Mu duk se ka shume fakte qe ti mundesh me i inkorporu ne artikull edhe kur diskuton. Pershendetje

Vijesti

Hi Davu.leon! You recently reinstated a removed reference about Aleksandar Ristović in the article Ramush Haradinaj (diff). The reference linked shows two articles, one called "RISTOVIĆ U SPUŽU" and one called "ŠESTORO DJECE OSTALO BEZ OCA". In which of these two does the police confirm "that at the moment of accident Ristovic was drunk – driving at a very high speed"? If possible, could you provide the exact quote where the police confirm this? Thanks in advance. A ecis^Brievenbus 01:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

I didn't read much into it but what is this translation which you needed? That which you said you didn't want to bother Nikola with. I might be able to help. Evlekis 15:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KLA Terrorism

Just to notify you, you told me that Robert Gelbard made a mistake by calling it undoubtedly terrorist, for which he was fired. I've read the 1160 UNSCR, and it clearly states KLA is conducting terrorist activity. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've also found the UN Chancellor's opinion on KLA's being a terrorist organization, as well as Washington's drafts in which it is deemed terrorist, predating late 1998 when the USA policies switched to support of KLA so the change was needed because a country that conducts war on terrorism can't self-contradict (next to other reasons). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have links for those? Would be interesting to read. Davu.leon (talk) 10:10, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the UNSCR 1160 (1998) for example:

Condemning..all acts of terrorism by the Kosovo Liberation Army or any other group or individual and all external support for terrorist activity in Kosovo, including finance,

arms and training, --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to INTERPOL, which considered KLA a terrorist organization:

In 1998, the U.S. State Department listed the KLA as a terrorist organization, indicating that it was financing its operations with money from the international heroin trade and loans from Islamic countries and individuals, among them allegedly Usama bin Laden.

It's link to Al Queda have been confirmed. Next to that, there is the CIA, which also considered it a terrorist organization. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I can only conclude that - we pretty much agree! :) Though, note that just if a KLA commander is claiming something - it's not to be taken as truth. The link to Al Qaeda is, indeed, dubious - just as that which occurred in early 1999 in Racak. But let's hope future will tell. Also note that the Kurdish terrorists have the popularity of national liberators - but they are still terrorists. In essence, yeah, violent secessionist movements (one Kosovar Albanian world was Ibrahim Rugova and totally another one was the KLA), do not constitute conflicts and are observed as terrorism - because that's the only way to preserve stability of the world. Cheers, all the best, and sad to hear about your retirements. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Idiot

You little idiot fuck you KOSOVO IS SERBIA FOREVER, "shit liberation army" or "kla" terrorist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.216.253.16 (talk) 20:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. We'll see. Davu.leon 00:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haradinaj

Yes, I agree that pro-Serbian (not just Serbian) propaganda on the KLA is indeed huge. And that many people are innocent. And that Hashim Thaci is no "bloody butcher"; I do not fall for nationalist and vicious lies. But Haradinaj's case is different. As you now, there was a systematic extermination of evidence. Haradinaj was released not because he was found innocent - but because of lack of evidence. Vojislav Seselj's extremist agents have succeeded in intimidating one witness - Haradinaj's mafia agents have succeeded in killing 7, 3 of which were under the international program of covert protection - and intimidating tens, so he even surpassed this dude.

I do not fall to Serbian, not to Albanian, not to American or any propaganda, nationalist or otherwise. Adem Jashari is generally viewed as a monsterous child eater in Serbia, and there's even a war crimes case opened against him. I belong to the supporters of the liberal-civic elite, where belongs the Liberal Democratic Party (Serbia 2005), which as you know supports independence of Kosovo, as well all the countless NGOs that fought against the terror regime, and even today most Serbians believe they are "traitors". To that circle belongs the globally-known Nataša Kandić. These people organized galleries of young Albanian artists from Kosovo across Belgrade and Novi Sad, where paintings of KLA fighter Adem J. were exposed. These people were heavily attacked by the Serbian Neo-Nazis, and the state doesn't give enough protection to them. These people do not fall to propaganda, and even in cases go beyond to, as you see, attain the adjective as national traitors. These people have worked greatly for the national reconciliation of Albanians and Serbs over the past years and did so much for that process, and some Albanians even vote in elections for these people (over 3,000 at the last election).

These people consider Haradinaj guilty. Let me remind you that the greatly awarded Natasa Kandic stated, that this verdict is something worst that could happen at this precise moment, primarily will be bad and greatly damage Kosovo and the Kosovar people, and then Serbia and all the Balkans. You should read Del Ponte's book "The Hunt". You should also read the report of all Western agencies on Haradinaj's case, which point out that the primary reason for this verdict is the systematic persecution of witnesses. This is not propaganda. Not Serbian or any other. This is really happening. Therefore, I reckon it only logical to conclude that Haradinaj will cement not only long-term instability of the new Republic of Kosovo itself, but also further contribute to the terrible rift of the Serb and the Albanian and generally move the stability of the Balkans ahead for a decade or so. This is not something that one side claims. This is the reality as much as an independent Kosovo is. As much as so as the fact that claiming Haradinaj actually worked to prevent atrocities is Albanian nationalistic propaganda.

I hope you read fully and understand. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you talked to Natasa Kandic, then you know what she thinks. :)

Be careful about illusions. Though an Irishman, you know live in the Balkans, which means that you're another Balkaner - and we are very susceptible to myths, distorted truths and most of all, hating all the neighbors and adoring themselves.

Speak for yourself. Nikola (talk) 19:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you poses some sources other than KLA's own, it'd be very nice to have them - because those so far present to the public don't speak well for Haradinaj one bit.

Have you got an e-mail? Or would you prefer a forum perhaps...or mIRC chat? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

“

[..]We attacked the Serbs constantly and murdered them every day. On every single spot. Day and night. Without hiding. Every day we have been killing Serbian policemen..

”

— Ramush Haradinaj, Story of War and Freedom

This is from Ramush Haradinaj's autobiography. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 05:52, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give us this books ISBN? No? There is no such ISBN? Maybe there is no such book? Please give us your source. --Tubesship (talk) 21:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[4]. It appears that it doesn't have ISBN. Nikola (talk) 19:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have returned relevant and sourced information about potential witnesses against Ramush Haradinaj which have been murdered to his article. I urge you to not remove it again. Your rationale for removing it is not very strong: the fact that they are not mentioned in the verdict does not mean that they did not exist, as the verdict does not need to mention all murdered witnesses. If you want to explore further, you may try googling for their names, f.e. Vesel Muriqi. Nikola (talk) 19:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Liberal Democratic Party had issues a statement just recently. They call on the Serbian government to face the horrors of the country's past once and for all and look on forwardly for the future, in an effort to make good Serbo-Albanian neighborhood relations (recognize Kosovo) and finally set if foot for a European prospect of Serbia, just like the other nations in the region. They also called upon those blinded by nationalism or in other illusion regarding Haradinaj's innocence to carefully reinspect the whole matter from a more objective eyesight.

I suggest the first to the Government of the Republic of Serbia and the second to you. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:R.Haradinaj.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:R.Haradinaj.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. TheFEARgod (Ч) 20:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indictment agaisnt two Kosovo Albanian leaders

...for intimidation and persecution of witnesses and obstruction of justice has been raised today. Their result will impact the appeal regarding Haradinaj's case.

What say you? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haradinaj's potential future trial

Serge Brammertz wrote in the prosecutors' joint statement that most of the witnesses in Haradinaj's case were being persecuted and intimidated, pointing out in specific Sefet Kabajasi, whose testimony alone was of crucial evidence. Brammertz criticizes the decisions of the ICTY council to publish data of the witnesses to the public, which eventually made them sitting ducks, also criticizing the release of Haradinaj to the public and permitting him to practice politics actively, stating that this also made an important factor in eradicating evidence.

The appeal demands abolition of the two acquittal charges and a longer sentence for the one sentenced. New evidence has been supplied to the ICTY, and the prosecutors, who criticized the ineffective work conducted by their predecessors under Carla del Ponte, will attempt to re-raise evidence and the witnesses that failed to stand. The appeal notifies that the verdict cannot be considered as just and is illegitimate as a product of systematic elimination of evidence by Haradinaj's associates. The trial of the two Kosovo Albanian political leaders on the grounds of witness intimidation will be crucial to the appeal, if their outcome is positive, the three might face maximum sentence. Brammertz confirmed that within the following 75 days the case will unveil further, including full data of the appeal. The process will develop within the following months, and within a year a new trial of the Trio can be almost surely expected according to the Belgian lawyer.

Also charges have been raised against a Kosovo ex Minister and his associate for witness intimidation. They will likely affect the potential future trial of Haradinaj greatly. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, according to the judges' verdict, the prosecutors have had increasing difficulties to bring the evidence on table - and that is primarily, since most of the witnesses were AFAIK intimidated by Haradinaj's associates in Kosovo (like former Minister Astrit Haraqija or the other one). Serge Brammertz stated that the prosecutors will try to rebring these witnesses to the trial - and it has stated that it has also acquired some new evidence. As for political motivations, I don't really see the room for it - from Serge Brammertz? Who is now angry that Serbia has openly admitted cooperation with the ICTY is not number 1 of its current assignments? And the same stories come from Serbian conspiracy-makers, how ICTY is an anti-Serbian instrument...

The ICTY is also launching new investigations regarding intimidation and persecution of witnesses, there might be new charges on that field, next to the two existing ones. The results of these will greatly affect the appeal, and should they end up in the prosecutors proving their guilt, there is actually no chance that Ramush Haradinaj gets acquitted again.

In the end, you must admit that there has been intimidation of witnesses. The indications towards those events are vastly overwhelming. Right? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roughly, a third was bribed, a third was intimidated and a third was murdered. Also interesting is that retired general Bozidar Delic, another crucial witness to the process, didn't stand. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're the first one from whom I hear Delic could be a war criminal. Could you corroborate that? Next to it, Delic has spent over three thousand hours in the past two-three years in the Hague, working for the prosecutors, the defense, or the judges. If what you say is true, it really wouldn't fit in.

I have to note to you that this is nothing which I stand for or allege, but what Carla Del Ponte and Serge Brammertz do - or the BBC, CNN, EuroNews, that Belgian agency etcetera...do not get this the wrong way, but if you think that all those people's mysterious deaths and all those witnesses' giving ups' a mere coincidence - that is very naive to think. Do you really render it all coincidence (including that protected witness)?

Why? Well because, unlike with many other cases, where there is standard Serbian nationalist-driven reaction, this one is actually not condemned by the Serbs - but by the world. There seems to be a global consensus on the very mystic regarding Haradinaj's case, and when I saw the witnesses popping out like that, especially when a year ago Carla Del Ponte worried that witnesses are being persecuted and that probably plenty more shall, from there comes my personal convincing of his guilt. And then the crucial momentum is the fact that the circles in Serbia which have always and always proven their objectivity - far more than any in Kosovo for example - which you yourself find valid (Nataša Kandić, etc), have all voiced their opinion against this. The liberal politician in Serbia, who worked on supporting evidence to the ICTY on Haradinaj's case (over 300 pages of documents), who supports independence of Kosovo, had compared Haradinaj to Mengele and calling him the most bloodthirsty mongrel after Mengele in the history of mankind. Now I objectively see through all these matters in full detail - seems to me only foolish blindness (caused by, this time, Albanian nationalism - or not) may be the reason to quickly claim and stand for Haradinaj being - undoubtedly innocent. I have already said that I do not EXCLUDE that option, and will gladly observe how will these details further develop (the trial of those who worked on witness intimidation, and Haradinaj's appeal). Also, for a moment in your words I could actually see approval of witness intimidation. Please tell me that's not it.

Are you telling me that only 2 witnesses died, one of natural causes and the other in an accident? Do you really think B92 is lying? I am today e-mailing B92 and will try to acquire a list. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting regarding Delic. I would like to hear something more more on it.

I have e-mailed my contacts in world's journalist organizations, to collect the names, because that would make some of the world's most credible institutions liers. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have received the news. It will be interesting how things develop. So far Delic was "more innocent" than Haradinaj, in terms of claims and charges apparent. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not answering sooner. The explanation is that Haradinaj is actually charged by a court, while Delic isn't.

I didn't know that about Bozidar. I shall gladly observe how the situations on Haradinaj and Delic reveal. Perhaps we should hope that he gets into the Ministry of Defense, so that he could remain in the public and not "survive" as most war criminals of ex Yugo.

I am still waiting a response from the B92. I also think that publishing their names - especially those protected ones - is a very wrong thing to do. Let me remind you of the ICTY's appeal and that they criticize the publication of witnesses' data, which most probably eventually led to their killings.

Here's an interesting report. Perhaps you'd comment it? I'll post here the most interesting part:

“

WITNESSES TICKED OFF THE LIST

There is credible evidence that this particular series of killings - five in all if one includes two police officers investigating the violence - is linked with the “Dukagjini group” convictions.

But especially in the current environment, it is unlikely that proof will be found to support allegations that associates of the jailed men have had a hand in wiping out witnesses.

What is certain is that although the crimes for which the group was convicted were horrific – and were committed against fellow-Albanians rather than the Serbian military – the trial met with an adverse reaction from many in Kosovo, where the men of the KLA are still regarded as war heroes.

Prosecution witnesses were regularly castigated as traitors by supporters of the now-disbanded guerrilla force.

A human rights report from the United States Office - or diplomatic mission - in Pristina published in February last year drew a link between Tahir Zemaj’s death and the trial at which he was a key witness.

Zemaj – at one time an officer in the Yugoslav army – was the wartime leader of FARK, which had been set up before the conflict by the Kosovo government-in- exile, then led by Ibrahim Rugova, who is now president of Kosovo.

With his son Enis and nephew Hasan, Zemaj – then 53 – died in a drive-by shooting in Peja on January 4, 2003.

FARK maintained a close association with Rugova’s Democratic League of Kosovo, LDK, and former members like Ramiz Muriqi still support the party.

His daughter works as a bodyguard for President Rugova. When IWPR interviewed him, he was still wearing the blue FARK shirt he wore to Musaj’s funeral in honour of the late Zemaj’s memory.

The US human rights report also traced the violent death of Ilir Selimaj back to the 2002 trial. Selimaj’s testimony for the prosecution had been of unique value, since he had been on the side of the accused at the time of the crimes.

He was a member of Daut Haradinaj's Dugagjini unit of the KLA, and confessed in court that he had been present when the four victims were killed, but was released in return for testifying.

On April 14, 2003, he and his aunt Feride Selimaj were gunned down in an ambush in the village of Nabergjan (also known as Pobrdje), near Peja.

The same report also noted the deaths of two serving KPS members who were investigating Zemaj's death.

Sebahate Tolaj and Isuf Haklaj of the Peja Region Serious Crimes Unit were shot dead on November 24, 2003 while driving to work. During the war, both had served under Zemaj as FARK members.

The UNMIK police established a Peja Task Force in 2002 to deal with the trial-related attacks cases. It made little progress, and has since been dismantled – without making any arrests.

UNMIK police have confirmed arrest warrants are still out in both the Zemaj and Selimaj murder cases, but the suspects are still at large. Police say these two cases, together with that of the KPC officers’ murders, are still under investigation.

”

There are far too controversies, far too witnesses, far too killed ones, and far too voices for him to be as clearly innocent as that. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:40, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you hear about the latest data regarding this, the ICTY opened another sealed charge, against a Kosovar journalist that publicly uncovered the identity of a protected witness. He was arrested by the KPS today and his trial begins soon. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bekim Mazreku

You can probably give me detailed information about him. Who was he / is he still alive / where is he? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian names given in the Slavic form

Hi Davu. The principle of including transcritpions of any Albanian person's name in a Slavic form is based on the individual's place of birth, or if he/she spent a significant period of their life living in one of the republics (eg. long enough to become a citizen). It is installed to show readers that whilst one person was born on a certain territory, this is how his name would appear in any centralised documentation, where-as to leave it out would mislead readers into either thinking that the common English name form was the name form of the centralised language, or that (as in Switzerland or Belgium) the source language of the individual's name had equal status as all other languages spoken within the territory, rather than being the autonomous feature which it was, and even then only confined to speakers of that language. Upon these principles, we have Serbian names for non-Serbs born in Serbia such as the following Hungarians: Jozsef Kasza, Monika Seles, Peter Leko. I am strongly opposed to Albert Nađ being given primarily in the Slavic language with his Hungarian name given as some form of translation. But they say that this is common English which it only is because he came to represent the Federal Republic of Yugslavia's national football team; and as a body, it chose Serbian as its sole language, so any non-Slavic player on the list donned their name in Serbian wherever they played. This is what also, away from Serbia, gives us Artim Šakiri, an ethnic Albanian representing Macedonia's national side. But for other Albanians, you still get Adrian Gaxha and Arben Xhaferi, both given in Albanian with their Macedonian translations. That's why I think the situation is pathetic. If you prosper throughout your life both as a sports star and a politician (like Milo Đukanović, basketball player & head of government but fortunately only a Montenegrin), your name will have two conventional forms but only one will be accepted here for name of article title. I support the principle of one's ethnic name taking primary position but I wholly oppose those who go one further and look to remove what they decrie to be "less desirable forms" based on their own private sentiments. I havn't addressed this issue for some time and so I cannot immediately recall other examples of multilanguage names given for people, but there are plenty of them across Asia and the former Soviet countries, and within multi-ethnic countries such as Russia itself. Haradinaj's first name can be written as "Ramush" throughout Wikipedia, the Serbian name need only stand beside the title and nothing more need be said about it. On principle, the Serbian language is given. To appear less provocative at times, Serbo-Croat (the name for Yugoslavia's national language) is given at times as it doesn't urgently require a Cyrillic form which the Albanians say was absent from Kosovo before 1990, though infact only as far back as 1974. When a name can take the same form in Albanian as it can Serbo-Croat Latinic form, there is often no need for a Slavic form because the Albanian does suffice. On a final note, this policy has even stretched across the Slavic persons of the former Yugoslavia where there has been variation in spelling, such as with Branimir Štulić, a Croat born in Macedonian. Look upon it as extra information, that makes it easier. Bare in mind also that where some countries do not recognise the existence of some ethnic groups (or did not do for long periods of time), that one who freely identifies as a certain nationality around the world may only have his name in his country's language rather than his ethnic language. I can't give any examples without scouring the site but this would have once meant Turks from Bulgaria (for a short period 1984-1990), any Slavs from Greece, Basques from France (before 1993) and even now to a degree, Kurds from Turkey. If you want to read about what it meant to publicly be Kurdish in Turkey, have a quick look at the Leyla Zana article. In the meantime, we don't ever use "BCS", that is only used by the Hague Tribunal, not by folk. I hope you will be all right with this. Let me know. Evlekis (talk) 15:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning

It was probably some vandal objecting to their efforts being rolled back. Katharineamy (talk) 13:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lisbon/ Kosovo

Thanks for agreeing with me over Lisbon. I just support Rep of Kosovo. I did support Hashim Thaçi, but I think hes becoming week recently. Can I ask where you are from? Regards Ijanderson (talk) 17:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dick Marty

http://coenews.coe.int/vod/20110125_01_e.wmv —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.110.244.16 (talk) 23:13, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]