Misplaced Pages

Talk:Yugoslav Wars: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 08:38, 15 May 2012 editDirector (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers58,714 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 15:15, 15 May 2012 edit undoJustice and Arbitration (talk | contribs)707 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 237: Line 237:


:::: Speaking of sources, do you have a scholarly source that explicitly states the Kosovo War was part of the "Yugoslav Wars"? Surely you're not expecting me to ]''?'' And I hope you're not serious in referring to the above as a "]". <font face="Eras Bold ITC">-- ] <span style="color:#464646">(])</span></font> 08:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC) :::: Speaking of sources, do you have a scholarly source that explicitly states the Kosovo War was part of the "Yugoslav Wars"? Surely you're not expecting me to ]''?'' And I hope you're not serious in referring to the above as a "]". <font face="Eras Bold ITC">-- ] <span style="color:#464646">(])</span></font> 08:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Dear DIREKTOR, you are a very diligent user here on Misplaced Pages, yet for some reason you often play the „amnesia game“. If you want sources, scroll up, we already had this conversation and I am not going through this deja-vu topic every six months. Stop going round in circles. Some historians do not consider Kosovo War as part of the Yugoslav Wars – while others do. Therefore, it can be included in order to give a complete picture.--] (]) 15:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:15, 15 May 2012

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Yugoslav Wars article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Balkan / European
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion not met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Balkan military history task force (c. 500–present)
Taskforce icon
European military history task force
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconEuropean history High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconYugoslavia High‑importance
WikiProject iconYugoslav Wars is within the scope of WikiProject Yugoslavia, a collaborative effort to improve the Misplaced Pages coverage of articles related to Yugoslavia and its nations. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.YugoslaviaWikipedia:WikiProject YugoslaviaTemplate:WikiProject YugoslaviaYugoslavia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconBosnia and Herzegovina High‑importance
WikiProject iconYugoslav Wars is part of the WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Bosnia and Herzegovina on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Bosnia and HerzegovinaWikipedia:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaTemplate:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaBosnia and Herzegovina
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconCroatia High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Croatia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Croatia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CroatiaWikipedia:WikiProject CroatiaTemplate:WikiProject CroatiaCroatia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconKosovo High‑importance
WikiProject iconYugoslav Wars is part of WikiProject Kosovo, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Kosovo on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Misplaced Pages visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.KosovoWikipedia:WikiProject KosovoTemplate:WikiProject KosovoKosovo
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconNorth Macedonia High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject North Macedonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North Macedonia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.North MacedoniaWikipedia:WikiProject North MacedoniaTemplate:WikiProject North MacedoniaNorth Macedonia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconMontenegro High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Montenegro, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Montenegro on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MontenegroWikipedia:WikiProject MontenegroTemplate:WikiProject MontenegroMontenegro
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconSerbia High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconSlovenia High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Slovenia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Slovenia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SloveniaWikipedia:WikiProject SloveniaTemplate:WikiProject SloveniaSlovenia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Slovenia to-do list:

Here are some tasks you can do (watch):

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on December 14, 2004 and December 14, 2005.

rename

I was a participant in these various conflicts. I've often heard them called "The Balkan Wars." This is the first place I've seen them referred to as the "Yugoslav Wars." It doesn't mean this is incorrect but it should be put forward here for anyone doing research. Gingermint (talk) 22:40, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

.

Alas, I fear that the term Balkan Wars already lends its name to two wars fought between 1912 and 1913 in the region. These wars have been called The Third Balkan War but it has never really caught on. I'll be honest with you, this linkage of events on this article are very much a case of Original Research. Admittedly, DIREKTOR trimmed it by removing the wars concerning the Albanians from 1996 onward but there is still no connection between the Ten Day War fought between Slovene rebels and a rump JNA comprising units from Serbia and Montenegro only, and the war between Bosnian Croats and Muslims 1993 time. At the same time, the events are in some small way tied and so this article is in many ways necessary as it tells the story of an entire region forming a relatively small part of the world and its transitions over only a few years. Yugoslav Wars does suffice. Evlekis (talk) 22:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
The three conflicts remaining are most certainly interconnected. The minor Ten-Day War is very much linked to the Croatian War of Independence that followed soon after. "Third Balkan War" is just silly. The wars in Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia have very little in common with the wars between Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, and Serbia ninety years earlier, taking place in a completely different geographical and historical setting. --DIREKTOR 23:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. The battles which took place in Slovenia and northern Croatia (eg. Slavonija) were most definitely wars fought on central European ground. That what was fought on the Balkan was on the fine edge of the Balkan and linked to that across the conventional line. Balkan War in any shape cannot identify the chapters of this article. Evlekis (talk) 10:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

SFRY & JNA?

I know Misplaced Pages encourages you to "Be Bold". But since this is a sensitive topic, I figured it would be better to ask first before editing:

  • Should the SFRY and/or the JNA be added to Belligerents? The SFRY existed de jure until 1992 (although as a severely crippled state), and remnants of the JNA fought in the Ten-Day War and early stages of Croatian War of Independence. Was their involvement too small to warrant a mention on the main article and should only be listed in the individual articles, or should they be mentioned here as well? Any thoughts? Ding Chavez (talk) 13:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Possibly the JNA, but I think its pretty much covered by FR Yugoslavia's entry. The infoboxes depict the last state of affairs, and the JNA is included in FR Yugoslavia... --DIREKTOR 14:08, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes just be aware that the JNA involvement in Slovenia (and needless to say early stages in Croatia) did by this time only comprise units from Serbia and Montenegro. Macedonia and Bosnia had long withdrawn their internal citizens from national military activity, as had Croatia and Slovenia (eg. military staff living on Croatian soil were recalled from Kosovo as early as 1990). The JNA dissolved in various stages. Evlekis (talk) 18:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Which wars were part of breakup?

Since dissolution of Yugoslavia is breakup of its constitutional Republics, only conflicts up to Dayton agreement can be considered as part of it.

After Dayton all ex-Yu republics became a new nations.

Conflicts in Macedonia and Kosovo are of different nature, and they are inside new Republics, so no longer apply to breakup of Yugoslavia (their goal is not relared to Yugoslavia in any way)

e.g. Conflict in Kosovo is a result of different series of events as explained here, that are much longlasting then Yugoslavia

http://en.wikipedia.org/Serbian%E2%80%93Albanian_conflict —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.105.5.56 (talk) 23:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Everything is very complicated. The Southern Serbian conflict was directly a spin-off from the Kosovo war. The Kosovo problems were the first to emerge in the former SFRY. The incidents within Kosovo dated back to the beginning of the Yugoslav Wars but then resurfaced after the Dayton accords. Either way, with the existence of a Yugoslav entity (FRY) with Belgrade as its capital, the two wars (in Serbia) involving ethnic Albanians are probably best billed as Yugoslav Wars. The stumbling block is Macedonia. Here, a government recognised for over nine years previously, had found itself at war with internal rebels representing a significant minority in the country. So whilst there was no conflict between Macedonia and the Belgrade authorities, the Macedonian security forces were at war with a faction which had links to both Southern Serbia and Kosovo conflicts. In 2002, after the war ended in Macedonia, there was an emergency period in Greece with Greek security forces on stand-by amid reports of clashes in the Epirus region. This did not take off, but there could very possibly one day be a conflict between Albanians and Greeks in Greece itself. It would be part of the same Albanian project as that in former Yugloslav regions, but can never be a Yugoslav War. This is a sticky point and it is a tall order predicting where to draw the line. Evlekis (talk) 12:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

I also think the Kosovo War and the Macedonian/Albanian conflicts should not be listed as "Yugoslav Wars". What have they to do with SFR Yugoslavia? (conflicts and political unrest in Kosovo may have played a part in causing the other wars, but this is very removed from the Kosovo War.) --DIREKTOR 12:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
My very point. If we don't demarcate this chapter in history, it could potentially spread to Greek government vs ethnic Albanians and then to Cypriot Greeks vs Turks and so on until the whole world is affected. Evlekis (talk) 13:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Hm, I don't know about that. There is no particular need to invent categories to sort Kosovo War, Southern Serbia conflict, Macedonia conflict. What is clear, however, is that they have little or nothing to do with the country that fell apart a decade before they took place. --DIREKTOR 16:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Intro lede

Can users please stop reverting the intro lede. We need to be honest and not play this article like Kosova in the hands of the Serb nationalists. You can't deny that the Yugoslav Wars started out and were characterized by Milosevic's attempt to create Greater Serbia. Take that out, you could still have had Yugoslavia today. Crackajack Mac (talk) 21:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

↑↑↑ Human rights I can´t remember what, sockpuppet.↑↑↑ FkpCascais (talk) 21:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Crackajack Mac has been blocked indef. as a sock of highly WP:DE user Human Rights Believer --Tadija (talk) 12:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Kosovo War, part of Yugoslav Wars (or not)

This article proves that Kosovo War was part of Yugoslav Wars. kedadial 18:50, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I do agree with Kedadi on this issue. The Kosovo crisis (precedent of the war) started during the SFR Yugoslavia period, the same crisis was re-birth again, just after the Dayton agreements (it was never "dead", just overshadowed by conflicts in Croatia and Bosnia), the main actors were mainly the same as from the Yugoslav period (Milosevic, Rugova, and even UÇK´s many members were active long time before the 90s...), and the conflict involved a country called "Yugoslavia" (even if a different one, FRy). Also, the conflict affected directly other ex-Yugoslav countries in the region and many were used as bases or logistics support for NATO, as Macedonia, Bosnia and Croatia (beside Albania), or Montenegro, as part of the FRY. I also support the inclusion of the internal Macedonian-Albanian conflict, and the separation from other regional conflicts can be donne by the fact that all this conflicts begin during, or just after the break up of the SFRY, and are located inside the territory of the same former Yugoslavia, while other related (or not that much) conflicts didn´t. Of course, this is just an opinion... FkpCascais (talk) 20:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Also, from NATO perspective, their operations begin during 1995 in Bosnia (intelligence, much earlier), and the Kosovo conflict was just an intensified continuation of it... FkpCascais (talk) 21:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


Personal views and monologues aside, what needs to be established is the position of the professional community. We need to see what the majority of the published scholars have written: Yugoslav Wars (and synonymous terms) 1991-1995, or Yugoslav Wars (and synonymous terms) 1991-2001. I'm hoping for Wiki professionalism and impartiality, not a "contest". Lets all just list sources on this subject and write up a note on how does each approach the matter (yes, even if one doesn't like it). This is the only way to avoid the stupid forum-like discussions where people voice how they "feel" on the issue, as its a pretty abstract subject (plus, this way we'll avoid the obvious danger of this discussion getting clogged by utter nonsense). --DIREKTOR 01:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

It's the thin end of the wedge. The Kosovo problems date back not to the beginning the Yugoslav wars but to forgotten times buried in prehistory. Either way, if the Kosovo crisis counts as a Yugoslav War then so do does the Preševo Valley war, and even the Macedonian conflict sees some form of continuity for one of the belligerents. At the same time, there is no relation between the Macedonian conflict and the Ten Day War (with the minute exception that Macedonia was still part of the JNA when the Ten Day War happened). That said, even since the Macedonian conflcit ended, there have been a number of minor battles and military operations to restore control over parts or simply uproot anti-governmental activity. Like Israel's modern-day problems stemming from World War II (1939-45), the scenario is never ending unless we draw the line. I'm neutral here, but in favour of a concensus. User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 09:47, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

@direktor - You can´t really talk normally, do you? You can´t have one comment without your favourite words: "non-sence" and "stupid". Those words pretty much describe your interventions... Learn some education, or go kick some rocks in your village... Imb*bdcj!

@Evlekis, it´s really hard to talk without having this pseudo-direktor throwing insults and showing his complexes everywhere. I really dont care, I have other things to do. I´m out. FkpCascais (talk) 12:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

None of the above refers to you personally, speaking of "complexes", I made that clear by spacing my post away from yours as well as by indentation. I'm speaking out of previous experience from discussions elsewhere - you seem to lack some background on this issue.
To Evlekis et alii: I apologize if I'm only able to post sporadically on this subject. I'm much too busy lately (too many rocks to kick at the hospital, I'm afraid :). be careful though, people without a college degree don't seem to be welcome... --DIREKTOR 19:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Serbian-dominated congress voted down Slovenian proposals

from the lead: the Serbian-dominated congress voted down Slovenian proposals for an end to the one-party system and for economic reform. That is actually an opposite to what the source says. Must be reworked. --windyhead (talk) 19:19, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

That's actually true. How is it "opposite", what does the source say? --DIREKTOR 12:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Why didn't you rephrase it? Can we see the exact source you refer to for ways that we can correct it if need be? User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 13:11, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

have no good rephrase for this moment. The source is the paragraph reference itself - - The congress voted for an end to the one-party system --windyhead (talk) 13:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Oh you were referring to the abolition of the one-party system? Yes that part is indeed incorrect. I'll rephrase... --DIREKTOR 14:30, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


Hi Windyhead. I have for the moment restored the version revised by DIREKTOR for the following reasons: I believe you are discussing the BBC heap compiled by Kate Adie. I accept that she is not an academic source and that her writing was selective and not wholly reflective of Slobodan Milošević: meaning, she was pandering to the prejudice of the typical "BBC freak", that means the lover of BBC1, BBC News 24 and similar institutions (she presents Radio 4's From Our Own Correspondent and listeners of Radio 4 or BBC World Service are of a higher intellectual capacity and are not as malleable as readers of that page). The point is that she was potraying the Idi Amin-style Slobodan Milošević, the Augusto Pinochet-style Milošević, the person with all the BBC design specs that simple readers love to hate. She did this by ignoring all related aspects and by not acknowledging Milošević's circumstances or any of his colleagues or opponents or their activities. If a Wikipedian produced the same information, it would be instantly removed for its open bias. However, it has been written, and is available on the BBC website, and BBC information qualifies as "reliable" on Misplaced Pages and we don't have a choice but to accept it. It does say "Serb dominated" for whatever that is taken to mean. The other thing that you have to consider is, if BBC is not reliable, what is? They have contributed to anti-Croatian propaganda as well, especially when they were compiling their essays to discredit Ante Gotovina. But the only news sources where one would find an alternative picture is HTV (Croatian television), and as things are, BBC and similar networks have the upper hand on this website. User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 14:41, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

What are your arguments about? It does say "Serb dominated" is false. --windyhead (talk) 15:27, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Oh ffs, it was indeed Serb-dominated since after the anti-bureaucratic Revolution Serbian party chief Slobodan Milošević controlled the majority of the votes. That is one of the most basic pieces of information, well known and undoubtedly correct. --DIREKTOR 17:01, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
If the source doesn't mention that, neither the wikipedia article should. --windyhead (talk) 17:25, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Its not a controversial point, its a basic fact, and it also follows from the text itself. Its not something to debate or dispute.
The congress was dominated by the League of Communists of Serbia, led by Milošević, who controlled the majority of the votes and blocked almost all proposals from the opposing two party branches - thus ruining the largest, militarily most potent, diplomatically most influential, and economically most significant country of the Balkans peninsula :). --DIREKTOR 22:21, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Um I'm not sure how much you've actually studied that particular congress, but the main point of disagreement at that session was how multi-party free elections would be conducted in the country. The Serbian bloc led by Milosevic and recieving the majority of votes in the Congress argued that the first elections should be held nationally at the federal level with the entire country voting for one president and electing a federal government. The Croatian/Slovenian block insisted that elections be held at the republican level and then for whoever wins in those elections to meet at a presidency and preserve the Tito-style presidency. The majority of the members of the LCY sided with the Serbian bloc and wanted elections at the federal level. When the Slovenes saw they couldn't push their proposal they simply walked out, followed by the Croatians later. In all honesty, that was the biggest, stupidest decision they could have done and with that act probably contributed most to the break-up of Yugoslavia. If they had accepted federal elections first, then no candidate in those elections could have won without advocating a pro Yugoslav platform and most likely Ante Markovic would have emerged as president. Instead, the Slovenes and Croats walked out, held their own republican elections and put in power separatist leaders which from then onward made it their goal to transform the country from a regular federation into six seperate countries in a loose confederation...something that de-facto meant ending Yugoslavia, and something that Serbs outside of Serbia in Croatia and Bosnia could never accept. So I would say that it was the Slovenian and Croatian leaders decisions to walk out of that Congress that eneded the most prosperous country of the Balkans...and not Milosevic's insistence that elections be held at the federal level Yugo91aesop (talk) 17:05, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

No mention of Kosovo war

There is only one reference to the Kosovo War and it doesn't mention the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.110.175 (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Kosovo War 1998-1999 should be mentioned because it was a part of a wider process of the disintegration of Yugoslavia. Here are some sources that Kosovo War was part of Yugoslav Wars:

--Mladifilozof (talk) 17:38, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Partiality

This article is very partial--Stebunik (talk) 23:46, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

The Kosovo war is part of the much larger Serbian-Albanian conflict, which is much older than the Yugoslav Wars, started long before the 1990s, and is still not fully resolved. --DIREKTOR 23:55, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Is Kosovo War part of Yugoslav Wars?

Let's settle this matter once and for all. Many have voiced their disagreement and opposition to remove Kosovo War from Yugoslav Wars, and I'm one of them. So a vote would be the best way to settle this issue. My argument, besides the fact that it is a part of Yugoslav Wars in virtually every other language on wikipedia, is that even the ICTY included it in its jurisdiction: the three Milosevic charges (wars in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo) were united into one single indictment . This clearly shows that you can not look at Kosovo War as being apart from Yugoslav Wars, but as part of the whole conflict.

There were also many other excellent observations for this argument used in previous discussions. Now, User:DIREKTOR seems like an intelligent person and his argument is that Kosovo was part of the Serbian-Albanian conflict instead. However, I think he made a small misconception in his conclusion in this case. Namely, according to that deduction, Serbian occupation of Albania in 1912 was then not part of the First Balkan War. But obviously, it was. You also have the First Sino-Japanese War and the Second Sino-Japanese War, which are both part of the Sino-Japanese conflict. Yet, the second one is also considered part of World War II, and not apart from it. So I would suggest for Kosovo War to be part of Serbian-Albanian conflict AND Yugoslav Wars. I do not understand why it can or should not be part of both. Either category is not exclusive.

So, let's vote. Is Kosovo War part of Yugoslav Wars?--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 16:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Nonsense. WP:NOTDEMOCRACY, what would be the point? People are not going to agree simply because you manage to swing enough votes here. The idea that the Kosovo War in 2000 somehow contributed to the dissolution of Yugoslavia is farcical at best, and a purely (Kosovar) Albanian concept. It is a minority view in the scientific community. Yugoslavia broke-up in 1992.
The Yugoslav Wars are conflicts surrounding the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (1943-1992). Yugoslavia broke-up, starting the Yugoslav Wars, which lasted up to 1995. The Kosovo War started as late as 2001 according to some researchers, no less than ten years after SFR Yugoslavia disintegrated and after six years of peace had already passed after the Yugoslav Wars were concluded. The point is that the Kosovo War has nothing to do with Yugoslavia, but is instead an internal conflict within the Republic of Serbia. --DIREKTOR 16:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Small correction regarding Kosovo War, 1998-1999. Cheers. — Kedaditalk 17:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes well as I said I'm sure every single Albanian user on this wiki is likely to "vote" yes here regardless of the facts, I just do not see how anyone could possibly think that these sort of "votes" will change the article in any way - WP:NOTDEMOCRACY. Don't let me stop you though... :) --DIREKTOR 17:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's not like there was never a case of different opinions discussed to reach a consensus over a matter on wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requested_moves): You have, for example, the Golden hamster debate (http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Golden_hamster#Requested_Move_July_2010) or the White Rabbit debate (http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:White_Rabbit#Requested_move), all of which can serve as the example how wiki users support or oppose some issues in the article.

"The idea that the Kosovo War in 2000 somehow contributed to the dissolution of Yugoslavia is farcical at best, and a purely (Kosovar) Albanian concept. It is a minority view in the scientific community. Yugoslavia broke-up in 1992."

Now that you mention the issue of majority and minority of scientific community, the notion that Kosovo War is not part of Yugoslav Wars is a minority view in the scientific community. Do I even need to again point to the majority of the scientific community that views it as part of Yugoslav Wars? (, , , , ). Dr. Craig Nation perfectly summed it up when he commented: "Everything started with Kosovo and everything will finish with Kosovo" (, page 223). By removing Kosovo, you remove the final conclusion to the whole conflict.

"The Yugoslav Wars are conflicts surrounding the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (1943-1992). Yugoslavia broke-up, starting the Yugoslav Wars, which lasted up to 1995. The Kosovo War started as late as 2001 according to some researchers, no less than ten years after SFR Yugoslavia disintegrated and after six years of peace had already passed after the Yugoslav Wars were concluded".

Almost impossible that the Kosovo War started in 2001, and we both know it. The fact that you even place it that late makes me seriously question your expertise about the issue. Serbs even place the start of the war in 1996 when the KLA started to operate (). Also - not that Yugoslav Wars are somehow magically only limited to Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and not to Federal Republic of Yugoslavia - but in September 1991, a referendum on independence for Kosovo was organized. The referendum achieved a reported 90% turnout among the province's Albanians, and a 98% vote—nearly a million votes in all—which approved the creation of an independent Republic of Kosovo. Ergo, Kosovo also broke up from the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1991, around the same time as Croatia and Slovenia. The war was just a delayed reaction. The only difference is that Yugoslav forces managed to hush up the independence movement for a couple of years, but not for long. Also, in 1999, Kosovo was de facto taken away from Yugoslavia. Kosovo's declaration of independence was just a formality 9 years later (This shows that it was the final nail in the coffin of the Yugoslav state. The break-up came in at least two stages (1991-1992 and 1999-2003). After it, Yugoslavia barely held for a few years until 2003, when it collapsed as a political union called the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro. In 2006, even that collapsed).

Again, why can the Kosovo War simply not be a part of both Serbian-Albanian conflict AND Yugoslav Wars?--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 16:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes it can, of course, it just isn't. The few authors who do perhaps consider it as such are a notable minority. --DIREKTOR 20:51, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
DIREKTOR, there is something called Misplaced Pages:No original research and Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view. When you claim something, I can not just simply take your word for it because "it just isn't so". That's just arbitrarily. If someone would simply claim that Zeppo Marx is not a member of the Marx brothers and remove him from the article about them, he or she should better have a very good source for it. So please, present us here with the majority of sources that Kosovo War is only and exclusively part of the Serbian-Albanian conflict, which started way back in 1912. Feel free to post as many sources as you wish.--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 15:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
"This is pointless vote. WP:NOTDEMOCRACY You cannot outvote fact that Yugoslavia broke up in 1992. I reject this false vote."
Once again, this is not about the Yugoslav break-up, but about the Yugoslav Wars. They are not synonymous. And I once again point out to Misplaced Pages:No original research, i.e., you need reliable sources when you claim something. Numerous sources were given that it is part of the Yugoslav Wars, none yet that it is a seperate part of Serb-Albanian conflict. One definition of Yugoslav Wars that I found was: "The Yugoslav wars were a series of violent conflicts in the territory of the former Yugoslavia that went on in the 1990s. They comprised two series of successive wars affecting all of the six former Yugoslav republics".--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 15:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I just recently checked again if I'm crazy or not, and even Encarta lists the Kosovo War as part of Yugoslav Wars. This again shows that my request for clarification is valid. Also, just take a look at infobox for Yugoslav Wars: DIREKTOR himself edited it and tolerated Kosovo War as part of Yugoslav Wars , until he suddenly, without any explanation, started deleting it from the list in January 2010. So, what gives?--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 11:05, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

YES

--Enric Naval (talk) 04:00, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Yes, Kosovo was part of the Yugoslav Wars. As far as we know, the international press, writers and scholars classify the 1998-1999 Kosovo War as the last of the Yugoslav Wars, which culminated with the direct intervention of NATO led by Bill Clinton against Milosevic’s Serbia, resulting in the pullout of Serb forces from Kosovo and the subsequent overthrow of Milosevic in 2000, ending the cycle of wars that began wen Slovenia and Croatia decided to separate from Yugoslavia in mid-1991.--BalkanWalker (talk) 18:00, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
  • --DustBGD89-3 (talk) 13:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC) Yes, it is part of Yugoslav Wars, as well as clashes in Preshevo Valley and Macedonia (1999-2001). I do not propose it, but on my logic, those wars which included Albanian inhabitants are third phase of Yugoslav wars- first phase ended with cease-fire on January 1991 (between Yugoslavia and Croatia, war in Slovenia was over at large), second included whole War in Bosnia and end of War in Croatia.
  • Obviously Yugoslavia was not done being broken up. Int21h (talk) 01:56, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Interestingly, the lead of the article does not say anywhere that its scope is limited to military conflicts which ended with the breakup of Yugoslavia (it only says that it covers the time period between 1991 and 1995, which is arbitrary at best and which clashes with DIREKTOR's argument anyway - Bosnia and Herzegovina was an independent country by 1992 so I guess Bosnian War does not belong here either according to that view). On the other hand, the infobox says that the result was "new countries independent" - and since we might consider Republic of Kosovo a country which is still in the process of gaining full international recognition, an opposing view might be that Yugoslav wars are still going on. I disagree with both possible interpretations. Because fact of the matter is that almost everything ever published on the subject that I've ever read (as well as ICTY) considers the Kosovo War as part of the same chain of events - the events in Kosovo in 1989 and Milošević's rise to power were directly responsible for kickstarting the events which led to Slovenia's Ten-Day War in 1991, which then spilled into Croatia's 1991-95 and then culminated in Bosnia's 1992-95 war. The Kosovo War which began three years later (although the events leading up to it began much earlier) marked the end of Milošević's reign and directly led to his overthrow in 2000. You cannot talk about the rise of nationalism throughout the country in the early 1990s without mentioning Kosovo and you cannot talk about the entire period without delineating it chronologically with Milošević's rise and fall. This is how historians interpret it, this is how they will continue to interpret it, and this is how we should interpret it. Copious amounts of sources corroborating this can be made available upon request. Timbouctou (talk) 02:27, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  • I noticed this only now... on a similar note, I only recently noticed that the Timeline of Yugoslav breakup had been split at April 1992. This made it incoherent and contrary to the description at Breakup of Yugoslavia, so I reverted that change. I think we should all agree that the Yugoslavia being talked about - did break up relatively early (~1991). But, that doesn't mean that the same processes and events abruptly stopped. Not only a lot of critical stuff happen after SFRY became dysfunctional, but there was still a Yugoslavia in existence, which in turn had inherited not all but certainly some critical SFRY issues - Kosovo is the prime example. Granted, in the end, it wasn't AP Kosovo that declared independence from SFR Yugoslavia, and the whole thing protracted up to 2008, so that's a bit of a stretch. Yet, the war was nearly contiguous - to remind, easternmost parts of Croatia were still in transition in '97 and early '98 - so to completely avoid describing it as one of the Yugoslav wars seems pretty arbitrary. In general, I'm in favor of describing the entire context, so a section about the Kosovo war in this article is necessary, even if we don't describe it as a fully integral part (in the lead section). --Joy (talk) 08:15, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

NO

This is pointless vote. WP:NOTDEMOCRACY You cannot outvote fact that Yugoslavia broke up in 1992. I reject this false vote. --Tadija 18:23, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

epilogue

I've restored a note of Kosovo to the lead. Maybe the rest of the removal edit should be reverted, too. --Joy (talk) 19:16, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

It should also be noted that the article "Serbian–Albanian conflict" was deleted on 7 February 2011 per Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Serbian–Albanian conflict. --Joy (talk) 19:18, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Joy, Kosovo War should be included back into the info box. Scroll up. You will see numerous sources and opinions supporting that move. As opposed to only one user who denies its entry. If we look at Yugoslav Wars as Wars for Independence from Yugoslavia, Kosovo fits in perfectly.--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 17:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Please go ahead and help, you don't need me to do it :) --Joy (talk) 20:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Albania?

Since when does Albania have to do with Yugoslavia? There was never a recall of war there aand since it wasn't part of Yugoslavija, it doesn't have any relevance. 68.202.26.86 (talk) 04:48, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Where do you see this mention of Albania? --Joy (talk) 13:04, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

File:M84a slovenija.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:M84a slovenija.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Misplaced Pages (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:M84a slovenija.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:22, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Kosovo war

We've had an anonymous editor try to undo this consensus based on "ancient hatreds and turbulent history". I don't think that's an appropriate assessment lacking any sources here. Given that Kosovo War#Before the War doesn't list any sources for its vague description of early causes, and generally starts talking with references since the 1980s, I see little reason to doubt the assessment of Kosovo War as one of the wars resulting from the breakup of Yugoslavia. --Joy (talk) 07:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Also, a random google search through Serbian sources gives me:
  • u zemljama bivše Jugoslavije, u najtežim trenucima građanskih ratova 1991 – 1995. NSPM
  • spomenik žrtvama ratova na prostoru bivše Jugoslavije od 1990. do 1999. Politika, NIN
  • spomen ploču koja je podignuta u sećanje na srpske žrtve stradale u ratovima od 1991-2000. godine na prostoru bivše Jugoslavije RTS Pravda
  • Problemi na Kosovu i Metohiji mogu se shvatiti, i rešiti, samo u kontekstu procesa koji su zahvatili bivšu Jugoslaviju 1990/91: Ratna pozornica se pomerala od Slovenije preko Hrvatske do Bosne i Hercegovine, i najzad zahvatila Kosovo i Metohiju. a University of Belgrade professor of international law
  • Raspad Jugoslavije, ratovi sa bivšim republikama, međunarodna izolacija i bombardovanje od strane Nato pakta 1999. obeležili su srpsko društvo . a University of Niš assistant professor
I'm not inclined to believe that the consensus in Serbia is that the 1999 stuff is distinct from the 1991 stuff. --Joy (talk) 07:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Joy, practically every single historical event in ex-Yugoslavia from here on end will most likely be able to be characterized, at least in some way, as having to do with the breakup of Yugoslavia. You could probably also trace them all to the Ottoman-Habsburg wars, or the fall of the Roman Empire.
The IP editor is actually quite correct, though he may have expressed himself in an unfortunate manner. The Serbian-Albanian conflict in Kosovo is, historically, a larger and longer conflict than the Yugoslav Wars. That is not to say that the Yugoslav Wars and the Serbian-Albanian conflict are entirely unrelated, but if anything, the former can be considered a sub-topic of the latter, rather than vice versa. The Breakup of Yugoslavia, and the Yugoslav Wars themselves, can be considered in great part a consequence of the Serbian-Albanian conflict in Kosovo. The Serbian-Albanian conflict long predates the Breakup of Yugoslavia, and its serious escalation began in the 1980s (as a consequence of the 1974 constitution, and after the death of Tito), but well before the Breakup of Yugoslavia even loomed on the horizon.
However one must also distinguish between the Serbian-Albanian conflict in general, and the specific confrontation dubbed the "Kosovo War" (1998-99). The Kosovo War and the breakup of Yugoslavia are not directly related. They're only related in as much as they both stem (one in part, one entirely) from the Serbian-Albanian conflict. The Serbian-Albanian conflict partially caused the Breakup of Yugoslavia, and the Breakup of Yugoslavia caused the three Yugoslav Wars. And the Serbian-Albanian conflict caused the Kosovo War. The weak connection from one to the other does not justify listing them all under the same category. I find that incredibly simplistic.
The Breakup of Yugoslavia did not cause the Serbian-Albanian conflict (which caused the Kosovo War), or in any way precipitate the Kosovo War directly ("bypassing" the more general Serbian-Albanian conflict). Rather the inverse is true: the weak and indirect connection between them stems from the Serbian-Albanian conflict precipitating the Breakup of Yugoslavia (among other major factors of course). -- Director (talk) 07:58, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I disagree with your assertion - unreferenced for years now?! - that the Serbian-Albanian conflict is so general to warrant disconnecting the Kosovo War from the rest of the Yugoslav wars. There is a historic aspect to that war, sure, but that doesn't change the straightforward and widespread perception that Kosovo War as such cannot be extracted from the process of the breakup of Yugoslavia. Kosovo was continuously disturbed before and during the first Yugoslav wars, what with the coup and the strikes and the perpetual state of emergency and the first declaration of independence, and the first guerillas, providing a prelude to war and a connection to SFRY that is a bit more drawn out but certainly no less strong than the road blockades and declarations of autonomy and various armed incidents and rioting that preceded the Croatian independence referendum and then the rest of that war. --Joy (talk) 08:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I am not saying that "the Serbian-Albanian conflict is so general to warrant disconnecting the Kosovo War from the rest of the Yugoslav wars". That is a straw man. This is not an issue of the Serbian-Albanian conflict being "general". I am saying that the Serbian-Albanian conflict does not stem from the Breakup of Yugoslavia, but that it was going on, in earnest(!), well before the Breakup of Yugoslavia started (and by that I mean the early to mid-1980s). In fact, not only does it predate it, but the conflict in Kosovo is one of the direct causes of the Breakup of Yugoslavia. And that is really a generally-known fact ("niko ne sme da vas bije!").
Speaking of sources, do you have a scholarly source that explicitly states the Kosovo War was part of the "Yugoslav Wars"? Surely you're not expecting me to prove that it wasn't? And I hope you're not serious in referring to the above as a "WP:CONSENSUS". -- Director (talk) 08:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Dear DIREKTOR, you are a very diligent user here on Misplaced Pages, yet for some reason you often play the „amnesia game“. If you want sources, scroll up, we already had this conversation and I am not going through this deja-vu topic every six months. Stop going round in circles. Some historians do not consider Kosovo War as part of the Yugoslav Wars – while others do. Therefore, it can be included in order to give a complete picture.--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 15:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Categories: