Talk:2001 insurgency in Macedonia/Archive 1

Which fucking Macedonian bastard wrote the article
They twisted the words of the Albanians, saying we started war because we wanted to be recognized as a second language!

1
As a direct participant in the Macedonian crises I want to add something about the number of casualities. Somewhat the oficial numbers you have are not quite true. there were about 90 macedonian etnic casualitie, a great percent of them were from the armed force. On the other side there were about 5000-7000 etnic albanian casualities. You see, the NLA was very succesfull in hiding there casualities. You can check this by simply checking how many new grave were during the crisis in the towns of Tetovo and Kumanovo, and the villages surroundg them.
 * if you provide sources, those statements will be added.-- TheFE ARgod (Ч) 17:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Links regarding the claims

http://www.rg.ru/2012/03/12/makedoniya-anons.html

http://ria.ru/world/20120417/627946636.html

https://m.makpress.mk/Home/PostDetails?PostId=216064

Only in the battle of Slupcane and Kumanovsko there where registered 105 dead NLA forces. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.157.31.5 (talk) 02:03, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

aka
for anonimous users, please avoid using the frase "aka" as it is unencyclopedic and not suitable for this project. -- TheFE ARgod (Ч) 12:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)  I disagree, aka is same as or, but the idea is same, also what about the nla casualties, how many did they bury, any good sources?

This user obviously lives in the "lalaland",coming up with such a huge number of casualties?????What does he think this is?A basketball match to see who killed more people??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uckforever (talk • contribs) 04:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

FYROM
The official UN name of the country is Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia, i.e. FYROM. In an article describing attrocities, please be so kind as not to create misunderstandings regarding their location, especially considering that the `true Macedonia', an excellent and very touristic place in Greece, where also many Albanians live and work, had absolutely nothing to do with these conflicts. It is unencyclopaedic to refer to countries without their proper UN name.


 * The UN uses "FYROM" because of Greece's problems with the name Macedonia; its use is temporary. "FYROM" is not an official name for the country outside the UN, and its use by other countries is a clear sign of their position on the issue (such as it is with Australia). Saying stuff like "true Macedonia" visibly exposes your real motive behind using "FYROM" in the article. The country's constitution uses the name "Republic of Macedonia", and it has been recognized by most of the world under this name. The name stays, sorry. --AimLook 11:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

And what exactly is YOUR motive, by using Greek Terms (Macedonia, Macedonians)for naming a slavic country and its slavic inhabitants? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.217.60.220 (talk) 15:14, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Civil war
It was never called by that way. It was always regarded as "on the brink of it". AKA removed again please use also known as form -- TheFE ARgod (Ч) 22:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC) I am no longer including civil war,(due to popular opininon, i still disagree though) except rewording, so watch out for this page, certain people do not know how to act. THey think they owe the whol damn wiki. The article should be called macedonian, this is bad english grammar, since the war belongs to whom, to macedonia, one word and these idiots on wiki consider this something wrong when in fact they are. Ok, check this out...

Mac·e·do·nian Pronunciation: "ma-s&-'dO-ny&n, -nE-&n Function: indirect noun

Mac·e·do·nia Pronunciation: "ma-s&-'dO-nE-&, -ny& Function: geographical name As you can see, there is a huge difference, and i dare you, tell me i am wrong, you can not, you don't have a face to show. I know a little about balkans, i spent 2 years in croaita too.
 * see 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, the names are given by geographical location, you know -- TheFE ARgod (Ч) 12:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * also it's Vietnam War and not Vietnamese War you got it?-- TheFE ARgod (Ч) 12:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Boskovski
If somebody knows more info on this dude, let's expand the article. I wonder what was the outcome.

He is in jail for (I think) six years for alleged financial offences when running his political campaign in 2011.--Markd999 (talk) 16:19, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

massive gap
is there anyway to remvoe that huge gap under the lead? SGGH speak! 18:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:UCK NLA.jpg
Image:UCK NLA.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 11:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

NATO
I never heard they fired a shot and sided with the Macedonians. They came AFTER the war to collect weapons. -- TheFE ARgod (Ч) 13:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * What exactly was the role of EU (Solana?) and NATO?  I do not understand the sentence
 * It is the only example of forces arriving from an UN protectorate and attacking a sovereign country.
 * Which forces arrived from which UN protectorate? Does this refer to Operation Essential Harvest??
 * Austrian (talk) 10:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Insurgency
Most sources call it that way. See also Insurgency in Aceh, Insurgency in Saudi Arabia etc..-- TheFE ARgod (Ч) 15:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Change Title
The title should be Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia (2001) Politis (talk) 18:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you please explain why? As far as I understand neither general WP rules nor Macedonia-related conventions require us to make such a move. I may be mistaken but I want to hear some arguments. Alæxis¿question? 19:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Macedonia is a region that was loosely defined in the early 20th century and it has seen much conflict. There is a 'Macedonia' in Greece, but also in Bulgaria and a bit in Albania. Therefore, 'Macedonia' in the title referring to the region. But, the insurgency only took place within the borders of the Republic of Macedonia (also known as FYROM). It seems reasonable that this should be reflected in the title.Politis (talk) 14:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Read the previous discussions before bringing up this stupid suggestion again. Köbra Könverse 08:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

See Manual of Style (Macedonia-related articles), it was agreed that, regarding the “Naming of articles and templates relating to the Republic of Macedonia”, then we must use “Republic of Macedonia”. The article refers to the civil war in the ROM. You could suggest ‘FYROM’, if you like. Politis (talk) 13:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, this is 'proposed' guideline... I don't have much against the new title but I'm fine with the old name as well - there was no insurgency in 2001 in Greek or Bulgarian Macedonia. Alæxis¿question? 15:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * As far as I'm concerned, all the external links, including the BBC, refer to the country as Macedonia. Köbra Könverse 07:30, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The argument stands. The BBC also refers to 'FYR Macedonia', I am simply referring to our agreed format, this means that the article should be Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia (2001).Politis (talk) 18:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * This is not an *agreed* format but a proposed one. Alæxis¿question? 07:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but "Republic of Macedonia" is the country's "established name" on Wikipedia, and the first mention should be to such. Plain "Macedonia" can be used after the country has already been introduced as the "Republic of Macedonia" and no further disambiguation is required. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· (talk) 12:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Jesus, cry me a friggin' river. Köbra Könverse 14:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The only other options would be 2001 Republic of Macedonia insurgency, 2001 Albanian insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia, or 2001 Republic of Macedonia conflict. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· (talk) 14:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

We agreed on a format to avoid friction and get on with information. If anyone like Kobra85 has bonafide objections against the name 'Republic of Macedonia', this is not the place to display. I go along with Kekrops and we should start changig the title. Politis (talk) 15:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Freedom Museum
I do not suggest starting a separate Freedom Museum yet because the building work next to it are ongoing and some exhibition rooms are still empty. However, it was established as a reaction to the 2001 insurgency and, as such, merits a place here. It is unofficially known as the NLA museum but the name was unacceptable to the Skopje authorities. Politis (talk) 15:20, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Roma casualties
What was the reason behind this edit? Could you provide some sources backing it? Alæxis¿question? 07:18, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox vs template
Does anyone want to discuss the whole thing here? Myself I don't quite understand what's the difference between them and why one is better than the other... Alæxis¿question? 20:10, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_384.shtml. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. MkativerataCCI (talk) 19:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Slav extremists
Where exactly all these Economist articles tell about 10,000 Slav extremists taking part in the fighting? Alæxis¿question? 19:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The article clearly states what there was Slavic para militants from various countries like Macedonia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Ukraine & Russia. and Macedonian officials confirmed theat they are armed and took part in attacking Albanian population in BITOLA & PRILEP. Albanian officials claimed that they were also involved in direct fighting in Tetovo. If that is the only thing you dissagree with it does not explain the reason behind the removing of other sources and information. PLEASE STOP VANDALIZING. 62.31.57.185 (talk) 12:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Could you show direct citations confirming this? Alæxis¿question? 22:43, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Recent vandalism
To the annoying anonymous vandal: For some reason, any article from The Economist won't load for me right now so I'll address those later. -- Local hero talk 20:52, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The "small fighting continued into early 2002" is sourced by another Wikipedia article, which is something you can't do.
 * For the NLA strength, the 1st source is another Wikipedia article. The 2nd is a broken link.
 * The 1st source about the number of Macedonian police is just a list of how many police officers global countries have. Just because Macedonia has that many policemen, doesn't mean all of them, such as those from Gevgelija or Stip, fought in the conflict. In the 2nd source for the police number, I don't believe it gives a figure. If it does, please point it out.
 * The 1st source of the KFOR strength citation gives no number of how many there were. The 2nd source is a Wikipedia article.
 * The BBC source and the The Independent sources do not say that the deaths of the Pakistanis were part of the 2001 NLA insurgency.

Article extension
Hello everyone. I just wanted to inform everyone that in the moment I am expanding the current article (which I generally find as objective) with a Background section, as well as a section on the battle activities and political dynamics of the conflict. Every paragraph will be appropriately referenced. TUNG/ПОЗДРАВ/SHALOM. --Модернист (talk) 18:53, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality
The administrator Future Perfect at Sunrise stated that the neutrality of the article is disputed. I respect him as an administrator, and abide to his final decisions, but I would like him to specify which inputs in the article are not neutral. While composing the article, I tried (and I believe) I succeeded in providing a reference for every sentence/paragraph. I did not use the official Macedonian terminology “NLA terrorist”, but instead applied the terms used by western officials and media, such as “NLA rebels” and “NLA insurgents”. Most of the materials I have used in the article were from English speaking publications and news articles (International Crisis Group, United States Congressional Research Service, Columbia University, Chicago Tribune, and especially BBC and CNN). I think that the article is neutral, reflecting news and inputs from some of the most established English-speaking news magnates and universities. If there are any parts of the text that you think are not neutral, please refer to them sp we can analyse them and discuss the possibilities to change them. Thank you. --Модернист (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * (Responding on request for comment .) Well, to be perfectly honest, I am personally unfamiliar with the details of this event. At first glance, the sourcing seems to be of reasonable quality. Maybe Future could comment on what specifically he's objecting to? -- Director  ( talk ) 17:37, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

What I was seeing while going through the superfluous links was a sentence such as "All of the evidence suggested that the terrorists were informed by radio about the route [...]". I don't know how long that sentence had been there, and honestly I have not had the time and energy to go through all the rest of the text yet. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:40, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Firstly, I am truly impressed with User:Модернист's expansion of this article. I believe that most of the sources are reliable (for example, CNN and other International News Organizations are commonly cited) however, some sentences sound a little bit not neutral. Therefore, I would recommend that these should be slightly altered so that they are a little more neutral-sounding. Otherwise, I believe that the article is perfectly fine. Cheers! User:23_editor 15:52, 20 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I've also found his work to be mostly good and neutral. At first, I was trying to figure out which POV he was supporting since those who edit this page usually have one, but I soon realized that he isn't trying to push a POV here. -- Local hero talk 22:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I have reviewed the article and it looks npov enough. I'm glad that it has been so much improved. Alæxis¿question? 06:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Great thanks to all of you for the inputs, all of them were very valuable. Future, I will do the best to do the covererage of events with even greater neutrality. Regards --Модернист (talk) 19:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Wars don't just happen i.e Vladimir Ortakovski (a member of several RoM governments)'s view about the human rights isn't NPOV (nor RS). The background section isn't a background section of the conflict but a POV view of the society of RoM (In 2000 the country’s emerging middle class began buying new cars, adding extensions to apartments and planning summer vacations abroad.). The way the article is written gives no indication as to why war erupted other than Regardless of the existing socio-economic and political status, the Albanians in Macedonia as a whole began to demand greater political rights.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 15:06, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Zjarri, the sentence that you quoted was taken from a report written by the International Crisis Group, it was written neither by Macedonians nor Albanians. Also the article clearly states what were Albanian demands: "Albanians in Macedonia as a whole began to demand greater political rights, such as making amendments to the constitution in order to declare the Albanians as a second titular nation of the country, recognising Albanian as a second official language and providing state support for the underground Albanian-language university in Tetovo. Albanians also claimed to represent as much as 30% and even 40% of the country’s population, not the 22.9% recorded in the official June 1994 census", and it continues to say that: "In contrast, Macedonians asserted that the Albanian minority enjoyed sufficient rights, comparable to or better than other minority communities in Europe. The Macedonians also remained suspicious of Albanian demands for autonomy, which they feared could lead to eventual secession or partition and unification with Albania or Kosovo.". It reflects the tendencies of both groups. --Модернист (talk) 19:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Casualties
Just because the 700-800 claim was included in a Russian newspaper does not mean that it is the Russian claim. Furthermore, the figure includes civilians as well as fighters.

According to this book (published by Yale University Press) between 150 to 250 people were killed altogether Link.

Obviously, one of the figures is wrong. My judgment is that a book published by Yale would be much more reliable than RIA-Novosti, a Kremlin-owned newspaper which might have some bias. Accordingly, I think that the figures without the "Russian claim" are the most accurate. I will therefore remove the Russian-newspaper published figures and include info from the book I presented. If anyone has any objections, please state them.--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 01:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Although the Russian figures were from a relevant source (official gazette of the Russian Federation, as well as from RIA), I agree with you that that is not as relevant as a research book. As for using the word "fighters" I do not agree. I also do not agree that the word "terrorists" should be used explicitly. Macedonian sources refer to "terrorists" and Albanian sources mention "freedom fighters" or just "fighters". The most objective and neutral term to be used in the article is the word "insurgents" - which also corresponds with the official name of the article. Are you OK with this? --Модернист (talk) 17:03, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Insurgent is much more neutral than terrorist as the latter has become associated as a term to discredit the legitimacy of one's enemy. Terrorist should only be used if it is in quotes, like it is in two cases out of four which it appears. In one case though, it is blatantly misused and that is the one which is cited by AFP. I cannot find a single use of the word terrorist in the source and I have thus removed it from the article. Another one which I have changed is the one from San Francisco Chronicle which uses quotations and that is what I have doen in the article.--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 01:49, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Shume mire. Tung/Поздрав. --Модернист (talk) 07:35, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I realize that this discussion is 10 years old but i'm fairly new and unsure if replying here or starting another topic on the same issue is preferred? I've checked several versions of this article and the only source that is ever used is the "64" that was written by an NLA spokesman, all other sources or even points of view are immediately discarded, my source from Balkan insight has the (unverified claim) text next to it the implication here being the NLA sources are verified? I also have two other sources from NLA veterans that describe at least 170+ casualties in the war. In this article by AlsatM an Albanian media outlet in Macedonia in the battles in Slupcane the NLA lost 105 men https://web.archive.org/web/20160606073118/http://alsat.mk/News/251054/poraneshnite-vojnici-na-ona-revoltirani-za-svojata-sostojba the article sites these are all interviews by Albanian journalists with NLA veterans.
 * The second is unfortunately a video but in it NLA commander Hisni Shaqiri states that only in the Lipkovo region his unit had 70 casualties https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEnGfCFMneA&t=433s
 * GoofyMF (talk) 17:47, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Also in the casualties and displacement section this quote is found "cited figures of sixty-three deaths claimed by Macedonian security forces for their side and sixty-four deaths claimed by the NLA for their insurgents. Macedonian soldiers and policemen were killed in clashes with the NLA, whereas NLA casualties resulted mainly from faulty weaponry or poor training." this implies the citation which is called AIM is neutral but the author of the text is signed as ISO RUSI who was a spokesman for the NLA, this part is incredibly misleading and aims to further downplay NLA casualties by claiming they were not the result of the Macedonian security forces battles but faulty equipment while all Macedonian casualties were the result of "NLA clashes" to say this is biased would be an understatement at least a third of Macedonian casualties were not the result of clashes but the reulst of police and army vehicles running over mines GoofyMF (talk) 17:55, 22 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I would suggest adding the source you provided here and adjusting the text to "64-105 (NLA claim)". Or if your other source provide higher numbers, then adjust the top end of the range accordingly. To your second point in which you point out that this text is based on an NLA spokesman, the text should clarify that this is based on his viewpoint. -- Local hero talk 22:09, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your help, for now i will only edit 64-105 because that's the only one i can cite, with the other source it should be 64-175 but unfortunately the source is a youtube video which i can assume cannot be used as a source i mostly provided it to prove how biased and unrealistic the source used in the article is.
 * As for the second thing i will for now only edit that it's the view of an NLA spokesman, but since we can use NLA spokesmen as sources i think it would be fair Macedonian government claims of 700-800 should also be added for neutrality
 * GoofyMF (talk) 15:26, 23 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks. Yes it would be appropriate to add claims from the government. -- Local hero talk 15:36, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

A Wikipedia editor is claiming the Albanian news station in Macedonia citing NLA veterans is "Macedonian propaganda" he has vandalized several pages related to the conflict by removing and dismissing sources as "Macedonian propaganda" and replacing them exclusively with Albanian sources which I'm sure are not biased, he frequently removes cited work and has on more than one occasion created Wikipedia articles without citations to magnify NLA victories and minimize defeats GoofyMF (talk) 20:21, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Bias in article and citations
The article makes a number of tendentious claims, using as citations articles from the more sensationalist Macedonian media. These were often simply not true. For example, it claims that the Macedonian army launched a successful attack in June to retake the Lipkovo dam, from which the NLA had cut water to the city of Kumanovo, citing only an article in "Vest". Such a "victory" did not take place.

The NLA did indeed take the Lipkovo Reservoirs (there are two); the water supply to the Lower Lipkovo Reservoir was indeed turned off; Kumanovo did indeed eventually run out of water. There the undisputed facts end. The Macedonians claimed that the NLA had turned off the water supply, which would indeed have been a breach of the Geneva Convention; the NLA claimed to the OSCE that the Macedonian Army had turned it off when retreating. There is in fact a third option. If the supply from the Upper Reservoir is cut off, eventually of course the Lower Reservoir runs dry, and Kumanovo runs out of water. But if it is not turned off from time to time, eventually Lipkovo floods. The OSCE eventually in June negotiated with the Macedonians and NLA for hydrologists to cross the front lines to turn the water supply on again so Kumanovo got water; before the conflict ended they had to repeat the negotiations so the water supply could be turned off again in order to prevent Lipkovo flooding. In other words what both sides claimed (and may have thought) was a breach by the other side of the Geneva Convention may simply have been resulted from normal water management.

It may be that this article needs an editorial policy of not accepting citations from the Macedonian (or Albanian-language) media alone as evidence of fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markd999 (talk • contribs) 16:44, 10 June 2012 (UTC)


 * First of all this article does not state that the security forces launched a "victorious offensive". It simply states that the police and army launched an offensive that had the objective of securing the Lipkovo dam. Another article was referenced which states that although the lake itself was secured, the offensive was stopped because of the fact that the civilian population in Lipkovo did not flee the village, and OSCE was then warning that bombarding the village will cause a humanitarian catastrophe. I have strong evidence that the after re-taking Vaksince and Lopate, the police and army offensive was stopped because of OSCE's pressure after evidence was found that the Zimberi family in Slupcane lost 10 members of their family when a tank grenade hit the basement they were hiding in. I use Macedonian sources for this particular part (Lipkovo front), because there are not much available information on Albanian or English newspapers about this issue. When there is available information in English, I use English sources. there was a discussion not long ago and majority of the reviewers agreed that the article is neutral. If you still think that some parts are not neutral please discuss them, a don't just erase referenced material. Faleminderit. Tung/Pozdrav/Regards. --Модернист (talk) 18:25, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I posdrav od mene. In your explanation of the re-edit/reversion you say that there is only one Lipkovo dam, and that the valves are in Lipkovo village. I remember that the valves from the lower dam are indeed in the village (the cemetery, I think I remmeber) but I doubt whether these were ever turned off. If you look at Google Earth you will see a higher dam {Glavnje (?) Lake) serving Lipkovo Lake). The offensive of 23 May was justified to me by a rather unhappy Macedonian Defence Minister a couple of days before it took place, on the grounds that Lipkovo Lake, and therefore Kumanovo, were about to run out of water. Although the mistakes made by internationals, Albanians, and Macedonians over the next few days might have occurred anyway, the sense of time running out about the water supply for Kumanovo (with its multi-ethnic population) certainly contributed with its sense of time running out.

A few suggestions:

In an insurgency, politics is usually as important as the military situation. The Frowick Initiative and the Prizren Decalaration need to be included. The map needs to be changed: Aracinovo was connected by NLA-held areas going back to Brest and Tanusevce. The July cease-fire is not mentioned, nor are its major breaches, or the probable causes (for example, the virtual take-over by the NLA of Tetovo on 24 July, which followed a refusal by the Macedonians to accept Albanian as a second offficial language) and their subsequent virtual take-over of Tetovo (and Gostivar) on the eve of the Ohrid Agreement. (Arben Xhaferi told me that he had to walk back from Gostivar to Tetovo after having signed the agreement). --Markd999 (talk) 21:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Except for a private conversation I had with Mr. Zimberi, no one doubts that the UCK has closed the valves located inside the village of Lipkovo. There is a court case (part of the so-called "Hashki slucai") by which Hajrulla Msini, better known as Komandant Shpati, and Sadullah Duraku, known as Komandant Ventili are being charged for crimes against humanity for closing the valves. DPMNE and BDI made a political decission to give amnesty for the four "Hashki slucai". Why do you Duraku was called Komandant VENTILI by his fighters?! Edhe per bitkes ne Tetovo ne Korik 2001, mos u boni merak, une do shkruj nji kapitull ter ne lidhja me ket. Before I started with the review of this article, it contained inly three sentances, now it has several thousand words backed by mostly English-language sources. I just finished writing about the Kumanovo offensive in May. Now I am collecting references for the rest of the conflict - Nothing will be left behind. --Модернист (talk) 14:29, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Modernist, I do not now doubt your intention to be objective. But I am 99.9% sure that the relation between the two lakes is as I have described it (the OSCE DID have to negotiate for the hydrologists to go up again before the Ohrid Agreement to have the valves at the upper lake shut again, and Bucko DID tell me on 21 May that there were only days left before Kumanovo ran out of drinking water, so the valves in Lipkovo must have been open then. In fact, of course, the water lasted a week or two longer. But the imminent threat of a lack of drinking water was one of the things which triggered not only the 23 May offensive but Frowick's acceptance of the Prizren Agreement.

It may be that "Commandant Ventili" shut off the valves at the upper lake, and so got his name. Logically, the NLA must have taken the upper lake before they took the lower lake; and even if the ARM retook the lower lake (which I doubt) it would not have made any difference. Personally I suspect that he took his nick-name later, but I doubt that this can be proved except by interviewing the hydrologists (who may in any case be, for various reasons obvious to people living in Macedonia, unwilling to tell the truth). Water made a difference; Boris Trajkovski told me that he had authorised the Aricinovo offensive after he had been told at 3 o-clock in the morning (wrongly, as it turned out) that the Rasce water supply for Skopje had been captured by the NLA.

As for Matejce, I remember MTV television coverage of it at the time, so the ARM must have retaken the village, however briefly. I do not however recall seeing any pictures of significant burning of the monastery, although I do remember seeing later pictures of the frescoes defaced. I can't see why the NLA should have burnt any of it, since (as you correctly say) it was an area headquarters (contrary to the Hague Conventions, equally broken by the ARM in respect to religious buildings).

I wrote something at Harvard in 2002 about the conflict which contains the best chronology which I think is available. I will try to get it onto the internet (at the time there were reasons to keep it restricted) so you can use it as you see fit. --Markd999 (talk) 22:22, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * If you still believe that the UCK did not close the valves, you are more than welcomed to conduct a research and interviews with the hydrologists from the public utility company in Kumanovo, and I believe in your honest intentions to uncover the truth. However, until the results of your research are published, we should stick not on personal reflections by Wikipedia contributors, or articles on blogspot, etc., but rather on using relevant sources for illustrating the events involving the subject matter . P.S. Even after the conflict workers from the Lipkovo dam produced a short crisis where they warned that they will cut water to whole of Kumanovo if their demands are not fulfilled (Just an interesting moment to consider in you research). P.P.S. You may have a theory why Duraku was called "Komandant Ventili", and you can write an academic article based on a qualitative research, and I believe that that can only help - but still the fact does not change that he was called Komandant Ventili (Valve), and was in Lipkovo during the conflict. As for the burning of the homes of the Macedonian civilians in Matejce, it was done during the ceasefire which was brokered by the OSCE - a ceasefire which the UCK broke. As for the chronology, please do share it, for it can only help the development of this article. Another thing that could help, and I have already ordered the book via internet is the memoires of Mr. Glenn Nye, who was an official of the US Embassy in Macedonia during 2001 and was responsible for applying political pressure on the Macedonian political establishment to sto the re-taking of Aracinovo, so the 27 American citizens inside the village can be rescued - he mentions this  in his book called "Inside a US Embassy". The same UCK fighters that the American army saved from encirclement in Aracinovo in June 2001 (as Komandant Hoxha), later took part of the full scale invasion from Kosovo that took place in the area of Radusha in Agust 2001. I will write about that later on in this article. Tung/Поздрав/Regards Модернист (talk) 09:01, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

reference renew
reference 26 (THE MACEDONIAN CONFLICT OF 2001: BETWEEN SUCCESSFUL DIPLOMACY, RHETORIC AND TERROR" by ZIDAS DASKALOVSKI. Centre for Post-Communist Studies St. Francis Xavier University. 2004) is not available under this link no more - the new link is: Daskalovski2004 (same University, they just reorganized their site-structure), would someone please correct the link? thank you -- Hartmann Schedel  cheers  23:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Reference 23 ("Macedonia: Country Background and Recent Conflict" by Julie Kim. United States Congressional Research Service (CRS). Washington, D.C. 2002) is not valid. Please update. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.84.184.239 (talk) 16:51, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Battle of Tetovo
I refer to Section 3. Fighting in Tetovo: it seems, that there is in the meantime a single Article about this: Battle of Tetovo, maybe someone like to link this Article? - greets, -- Hartmann Schedel  cheers  23:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

POV tag added, not neutral point of vies
Large parts are using propaganda Slavic Macedonian sources, that are pure lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.123.175.220 (talk) 02:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Komandant Teli, also know as Lefter Koxhaj as commander of the NLA
He was the main Commander of the Battle of Aracinovo, together with Commander Hoxha where the NLA managed to hold ground and threatened to attack the capital city Skopje with mortars. In Albania Lefter was declared Martyr of the Albanian Nation by the President of Albania. Some video footage and photos of Komandant Teli in the war: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tvPgy3hBe0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.123.175.220 (talk) 02:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)


 * YouTube videos are not considered a reliable source. Please find another one. Also, why have you added the POV tag to the article? You haven't presented any concerns about its neutrality here. -- Local hero talk 03:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Concerns about POV
From my reading of this article, it seems like it is almost entirely written from the Macedonian point of view. There are frequent mentions of minor figures on the Macedonian side, but very few from the Albanian side. The engagements are described from the POV of the Macedonian side (ie. "when four policemen from the Raduša police station, during a terrain patrol of the border, discovered a NLA camp of 40 insurgents"). This is obviously not neutral and my suggestion would be to portray them in more general terms -- eg. "There was a clash between Macedonian police forces who had run into an NLA camp during patrol." I may contribute to this article some time in the future to make it more neutral as I have access to a variety of reliable sources.

Also, what's up with all the pictures of Macedonian police posing in mountains and forests? If you want to put them on Facebook, that's fine, but Wikipedia is no place to share memories. I think at least some of them should be included (such as the one with the tank), but the rest should be removed. Or if you want to include them, there should be just as many pictures of NLA men posing with big guns.--Franz Brod (talk) 16:19, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


 * The article is much more balance than other about war in Jugoslawia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malomomce (talk • contribs) 20:57, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Agreed, I would recommend the removal of the three posed images as they do not fit in Wikipedia. Vepton (talk) 19:09, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Are there images from the Albanian side that could add value to the article? Probably the Macedonian Special Police Unit photo could be removed. Alaexis¿question? 20:51, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

The lead is incomprehensible
I don't know much about this conflict. Reading the lead was just confusing. It states "The goal of the NLA was to separate Republic of Macedonia and make Greater Albania", then later "There were also claims that the group ultimately wished to see Albanian-majority areas secede from the country, though high-ranking NLA members have denied this". What does the first sentence mean, "separate Republic of Macedonia"? It sounds like it is implying the goal was to see Albanian majority areas secede. If this wasn't the goal, then what was it? I have no idea from reading the lead. Rob984 (talk) 15:38, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on 2001 insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://lajmpress.com/lajme/maqedoni/5447.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120330000920/http://articles.cnn.com/2001-05-13/world/macedonia_1_key-ethnic-albanian-party-party-for-democratic-prosperity-blagoja-markovski?_s=PM%3AWORLD to http://articles.cnn.com/2001-05-13/world/macedonia_1_key-ethnic-albanian-party-party-for-democratic-prosperity-blagoja-markovski?_s=PM%3AWORLD
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://groups.yahoo.com/group/decani/message/60966
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/DOM204A.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.morm.gov.mk/morm/en/pr/news/8_god_od_vejce.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140606224809/http://www.kultura.com.mk/BookDetails.aspx?Pr=467 to http://www.kultura.com.mk/BookDetails.aspx?Pr=467
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070509042555/http://www.antiwar.com/orig/deliso41.html to http://www.antiwar.com/orig/deliso41.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070311112319/http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/04/04/macedonia.clash/index.html to http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/04/04/macedonia.clash/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:29, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on 2001 insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090305050053/http://www.ecmi.de/jemie/download/Focus1-2002Brunnbauer.pdf to http://www.ecmi.de/jemie/download/Focus1-2002Brunnbauer.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070722031334/http://www2.iisg.nl/id/Systematik.asp?cat=8&id=107 to http://www2.iisg.nl/id/Systematik.asp?cat=8&id=107
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061127093707/http://www.humanrights.coe.int/Media/activities/stability%20pact/2000/table.htm to http://www.humanrights.coe.int/media/activities/stability%20pact/2000/table.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070208023205/http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/mkd-summary-eng to http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/mkd-summary-eng
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006155627/http://www.icty.org/sections/TheCases/JudgementList to http://www.icty.org/sections/TheCases/JudgementList
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070712033646/http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr115.html to http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr115.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

aaaaaaa
?Shouldn't it be called the Republic of North Macedonia rather than the Republic of Macedonia after the referendum that changed the name of the country — Preceding unsigned comment added by RajanD100 (talk • contribs) 00:56, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Name changes like this aren't retroactive as far as Wikipedia is concerned; which is why don't refer to the Großdeutsches Reich as Bundesrepublik Deutschland. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 20:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 8 December 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved by unanimous support &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:07, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

2001 insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia → 2001 insurgency in Macedonia – There was no other insurgency in any other Macedonia that year (so WP:PRECISE) and most contemporary English-language news sources from the time just used plain "Macedonia" when referring to the then-ongoing conflict (so MOS:COMMON). – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 21:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Support. Makes sense to me. -- Local hero talk 01:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. Per the moving rationale comment made by Illegimate Barrister. — Tom (T2ME) 09:47, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Less Unless (talk) 22:26, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Support most common and sufficiently precise.--Staberinde (talk) 17:47, 17 December 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Why are the 4 albanian crimes again at humanity Not documented Here ?!
- there are 4 terrorist acts of the so called NLA/UCK commited in 2001 again at Macedonians:

1. 12 civolians Kidnapped from and Killed from their homes 2. Mavrovo workers kidnaped from Road works and tortured. UCK fighters we're writing letters with knives into the flash on the Back of These people 3. NLA leadership 4. They closed water in lipkovo on whole City of Kumanovo leaving 60.000 civilians, children For weeks with No drinking water

Write these facts in the article, you can find Them everywhere in Internet ! 2A02:810D:E80:4E6C:81B2:2842:EE6E:E94A (talk) 22:18, 12 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Feel free to add this information, assuming there are reliable sources which describe them and giving them appropriate weight. Alaexis¿question? 12:01, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Ukraine as a Belligerents sources
- While the source http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/23/world/rebels-secure-a-base-in-macedonian-town.html mentions that weapons were acquired from Ukraine, but does not state the government was part of this conflict. - The reference from the Jamestown.org isn't a primary source. Without a better source to back this up I don't believe this source can be trusted. - If no other sources can be found to back this up. Ukraine should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChicagoEd (talk • contribs) 14:15, 14 July 2017 (UTC)


 * This is an old post but I have to agree, especially given the recent edits of the page. Ukraine was not a belligerent in the war, it did sell weapons to Macedonia but that can hardly be constituted as being a belligerent. Also Ukraine stopped after it was pressured by the US. The Russian invasion of Ukraine page is a good example, everybody has seen countless countries donating weapons to Ukraine for free, but they are not listed as belligerents in the infobox despite donations being a far more belligerent action than simply selling weapons from one state to another, all perfectly legal.
 * GoofyMF (talk) 00:22, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Ukrainian pilots were sent to Macedonia to fight Albanian rebels which means Ukraine counts as a Belligerent Based.shqiptar.frompirok (talk) 23:37, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

AKSH involvement.
why is AKSH removed when sources indicate it was involved ? 178.175.116.79 (talk) 23:01, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

2001 insurgency in Macedonia
Macedonians and albanians have always argued about who won the 2001 insurancy in Macedonia, one thing that we all can agree on is that nato was in it and it stoped the tention in the war In the article we should add nato as a 3rd combat to the war as it had broken the conflict between the NLA and the Macedonians Patrick batmen123 (talk) 17:45, 15 December 2022 (UTC)


 * A procedural note: your edits have added information to the infobox without adding anything to the article body. Infoboxes serve as summaries of the article; information in the infobox must appear in the article as well, and it is its prominence within the article that establishes its dueness for inclusion in the infobox. I haven't reviewed the sources you've provided, but assuming that they are valid, you should use them to first add relevant content to the article body, and only then consider adding them to the infobox. signed,Rosguill talk 20:40, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm realizing now that your most recent changes were concerning the inclusion of Albanian paramilitary groups as belligerents, and not the inclusion of NATO, which is the thread you've started here. Regardless, the general advice stands. signed,Rosguill talk 20:43, 27 December 2022 (UTC)


 * There was no "insurancy" in Macedonia at the time, there was an insurgency. The Mujahedeen stuff has always been an unproven claim, usually made by those with anti-Albanian or pro-Macedonian bias. Sth about that can be written in the article, but not in the infobox as it would be misleading. Your sources do not say that the Kosovo Protection Corps fought in the conflict. They say that some (apparently five) members of KPC fought, and for that they were expelled from the organization. The other Albanian organization you added has no source to back its addition. Read WP:RS, WP:OR and WP:3RR carefully, it seems that you do not understand the editing process as much as you should. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:40, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Nigel mentions a unit of mujahedin in his Yugoslav wars, p. 53 ("There was also an independent unit of 150 Mujahedin from Afghanistan, Bosnia and Turkey under Selim Ferit.") Alaexis¿question? 08:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Vaksince Attack into 2001 insurgency in Macedonia
These two articles, Vaksince Attack and Vaksince offensive, suffer from the same problem. While some (not even a majority) of the references in these articles specifically address Macedonian military maneuvers in Vaksince, none of them refer to a "Vaksince attack" or "Vaksince offensive" in a fashion that rises above WP:NOTNEWS. I was not able to find any results in a google scholar search, which leads me to conclude that these battles are not notable enough to meet WP:GNG, and thus should be merged to the broader article about this conflict. signed,Rosguill talk 01:38, 5 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree in part, the so called Vaksince Attack page was intentionally made to create a battle and an NLA victory out of thin air. The Vaksince Attack is the "Vaksince Ambush" refered to in both Operation MH-2, you can check the infobox it claims 2 Macedonian dead 1 captured which is identical to the so called "Vaksince attack" and the Vaksince offensive furthermore check the Vaksince offensive it was originally created with the "NLA victory" tag (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vaksince_offensive&oldid=1084631004) citing a BBC article that outlines the events, it says that on may 3 a Macedonian offensive in Vaksince "failed" after checking all avaliable sources it's clear that there was no such offensive and that the NLA did not stop or even fight a Macedonian Army offensive. On May 3 the Macedonian Army planned an offensive and submitted a deadline by May 3 to release the captured soldier and evacuate the civilians in the city after which it started preparatory shelling both to threaten the NLA and to get the civilians to leave, the civilians did not leave and the soldier was later released, the planned offensive in the wider region began 5 days later on May 8 and was called Operation MH-2 which like the infobox says on the Vaksince offensive was halted by foreign influences due to the civilian presence in the region.
 * The Vaksince offensive and Operation MH-2 are one and the same they were intentionally separated by Albanian wikipedia editors to create an NLA victory on the fact that the operation was postponed. According to the memoirs of the Macedonian General who planned the operations found here online page 61 (https://macedonianhistory.ca/Stefov_Risto/Svedoshtva%20-%202001%20-%20e-book%20Macedonian.pdf)
 * "According to the proclamation, an ultimatum was also given in the village of Vaksince for the captured soldier be handed over. Due to the severity of
 * the situation, because the captured soldier was not handed over, after the appointed time, '''warning actions were carried out in the village.
 * Vaksince on 5/3/2001'''. The actions were outside the village itself after certain battle positions.
 * It was still a preparation for the upcoming military operation that is, the previous combat actions were a warning
 * so the population in the villages would move out" it should be noted that the page has several typos including the /5/3/2001 aka the American way of coutning dates and not the 3/5/2001 that it should be the mistake is only in that format when speaking in prose the date is correct, one day before Operation MH-2 he says he received a videotape from UK ambassador and he says the correct date May 7. "Around 8:00 p.m. (May 7, 2001), Zvonko Kashirski came and we played the videotape in the office of the head of the General Education what brought her''' etc
 * After that on page 65 the title says "Execution of the Operation MH-2" and then recalls the events mentioned in Vaksince offensive ie the offensive being halted by the President under pressure from the West due to the civilian presence in the region. So in other words Vaksince attack and "Vaksince offensive" should both be moved to Operation MH-2 as the casualties are there.
 * I was going to make and still will, a talk page on the constant misuse of sources and creation of pages for the sole purpose of claiming NLA victories.
 * GoofyGoofyson (talk) 16:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I disagree, Firstly Macedonians created several similar wikipages like the Skopje Raid or the Raduša ambush, which were almost entirely based on Macedonian sources, while this Page only uses reliable western sources, yet a merge or a deletion was not proposed. Secondly the Attack/Ambush in Vaksince was important, since it was one of the first times where the NLA captured territory and it drectly led to the first Major Offensive by Macedonian Forces on 3 May 2001. You also mentioned that you couldn't find any sources about the Vaksince offensive, yet when i typed in "vaksince offensive 3 may 2001" i found multible news articles mentioning the Incident in detail, those sources also mention the ambush/attack of the NLA in Vaksince in detail, since it happend on the same day. Karadakli230 (talk) 02:21, 5 November 2022 (UTC)


 * But can you find peer-reviewed scholarly sources that discuss it? This isn't something that happened yesterday, it's more than two decades old. If it were of outsize significance, it would be covered in scholarly literature by now. Meanwhile, if there are articles with similar problem for the other military faction, I would be in favor of merging them too. signed,Rosguill talk 02:25, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Noting the recent edits at Vaksince Attack, at a glance  look like good sources! But, their treatment of hostilities in Vaksince is brief, as part of a more general overview of this phase of the campaign more broadly. Based on the level of granularity in the sources, you could probably justify creating an article for the events described in the Fighting in Kumanovo section of the 2001 insurgency aarticle (maybe with a better title). I stand by my assessment of the suitability of splitting off an article, and note that the US press declaration that was added is exactly the kind of primary source that a carveout article invites but which is simply WP:OR without secondary sources. signed,Rosguill talk 03:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The sources you just posted say that the attacks were on May 6 and only mentions artillery/mortar/helicopter attacks and that it was done to warn the civilians to leave the area for the upcoming offensive which was Operation MH-2 and that the NLA did not defend from or stop a Macedonian ground offensive which is implied by the Vaksince attack page.
 * The Vaksince attack page stated that "On the same day Macedonian forces started a Offensive in the village of Vaksince Macedonian army halted their offensive and failed to regain control over the village" even tho by all accounts the offensive did not start and the shelling  was a direct response to the ambush, according to this blatant POV pushing by the Albanian wikipedia editor the implication is that A: The offensive  was not related to the ambush B: The Macedonian army failed in it's offensive
 * This is an attempt to create a Macedonian Army failure against the NLA who would have won this supposed battle. Even tho it's clear that the shelling on May 3 was in direct response to the ultimatum to release the man held hostage and was only shelling not an offensive, no army in the world can start an offensive in less than 24 hours which is implied by the Albanian wikipedia editors who desperately hope to find a way to imply an NLA victory against a Macedonian Army offensive.
 * The Macedonian government aborted the military operations to avoid civilian casualties this was praised by the US in the "reactions page":
 * "We support the measured response of the Macedonian armed forces to such terrorist violence. We have continued to urge the Government of Macedonia to do everything possible to avoid civilian casualties as they take the necessary steps to uphold the rule of law."
 * This measured response and care for civilians that the Macedonian government showed is used to claim an NLA victory
 * GoofyGoofyson (talk) 17:27, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The Skopje raid actually happened and it was important in several ways, because the NLA in Arcinovo threatened to attack the capital so the finding of NLA men there confirms that the NLA planned operations in the capital, and it was also important in that because of that action that the NLA committed the Karpalak ambush.
 * The radusha ambush is no less important than the Gajre ambush and Ambush near Tanuševci, during the Gajre ambush 5 soldiers died and Tanusevci 3. The Radusha ambush would have cost 7 and would be as heavy a death toll as the Vejce ambush the only reason you don't think it's relevant is that the NLA lost. Furthermore on the Lisec ambush you deleted all Macedonian sources and claimed that it was an NLA failure not a Macedonian victory even tho it is one and the same, an NLA failure is a Macedonian victory. But because you do not edit in good faith, instead try to create NLA victories out of thin air and deny Macedonian victories you added NLA failure becuase i assume it's less offensive to you than a Macedonian victory.
 * As for the NLA capturing Vaksince this is absurd as Vaksince was not defended by police or army checkpoints the NLA infiltrated the village and ambushed the patrol on it's way back from a border outpost and then proclaimed a liberated territory and was subsequently defeated during Operation Vaksince a scaled down version of the Operation MH-2 which was postponed. You also changed Macedonian-KFOR victory to KFOR-Macedonian victory on the tanusevci incident because again your plan is obviously to minimize Macedonian victories another and blatant case of the fact that you do not argue in good faith is your editing of the radusha battle without citations that the Macedonian Army had 2000 soldiers and 30 tanks and that the NLA captured Kuckovo as well as Radusha. And now you are using a source that says the NLA "captured" radusha in July for the battle which is in August.
 * GoofyGoofyson (talk) 17:02, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Goofy, your most recent edits at Vaksince Attack seem rather WP:POINT-y, can we take a step back and figure out what peer-reviewed sources say about the periodization of the conflict should be before making such edits? signed,Rosguill talk 17:27, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with that, if the Albanian wikipedia editors actually used the same criteria before they intentionally created fictional battles. I will cease edits on the page because i believe that all the information i posted clearly shows that it was an ambush and not a battle for control of a village and i used the same sources in the article only i added quotes to clarify what the sources actually said which is why i don't consider it "POV pushing" i also added a more detailed Macedonian account of the battle which does not disagree with the other accounts and is there merely to give more detailed information.
 * GoofyGoofyson (talk) 17:31, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * ,, I've put a request for further participation at WP:PAM, and posted neutral invitations to WikiProjects for North Macedonia, Albania, Yugoslavia and Military history in order to help us reach a consensus. signed,Rosguill talk 23:51, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * This is very good. I am fairly new to wikipedia editing would you mind explaining if there is anything i need to do personally? Thank you
 * GoofyGoofyson (talk) 11:08, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Now we wait (again). The PAM backlog is quite slow. If any other editors feel motivated to participate irrespective of how they found the discussion, they can also help us move towards consensus. signed,Rosguill talk 15:22, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Constant vandalism in order to create NLA victories and editing in bad faith
I have been editing articles here for months and there is a constant attempt by Albanian editors to vandalize articles without any good citations to imply NLA victories or flat out invent battles or restrict dating for the same reason. The most recent ones have happened after the merger of two articles about the fighting in Vaksince and a new page for the fighting around Matejce.

VAKSINCE

The page was originally for Operation Vaksince which was a military offensive by the Macedonian Army which ended in success on may 25th. Now the dating has been pushed to May 3 - June 6th. The name was changed to "Battle of Vaksince" and the result changed to "NLA victory", previously Albanian editors tried inventing "Vaksince attack" which was a small ambush already in the main article and "Vaksince Operation" an Operation that never happened on May 3 to imply the NLA stopped the offensive.

1. The fighting around Vaksince did not end on June 6th this is completely arbitrary 2. The Macedonian Army did not launch any offensives in the Kumanovo-Lipkovo area due to: a) The civilian population was still in the village and would lead to massive casualties b) The West forced Macedonia to cancel the offensives to allow diplomatic talks to continue

There is no proof that the NLA took Vaksince apart from the fact that they declared victory:

The citations used are only one CNN article that states that the claim comes from the NLA and could not be independently verified. (https://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/06/07/macedonia.riot.02/index.html) >''"The NLA's Commander Shpati said his men completely controlled Matejce, the focus of fierce fighting at the weekend, and were once more occupying the village of Vaksince. The claims could not be independently confirmed"

In a JSTOR book on the conflict there is no mention what so ever on the recapture of the village only that the Macedonian Army recaptured the village during the military operation, and that afterwards the NLA started offensive operations in Matejce. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/24919730?seq=11#metadata_info_tab_contents)

Matejce

Another newly created battle with the "NLA victory" result. Timeframe 24 May - June 5. This is also part of the Kumanovo-Lipkovo fighting and is also mentioned in the main article and the same problems with Vaksince apply.

1. The Macedonian army fought for the village well after June 5 2. The Macedonian army offensive that was planned was halted because of civilian presence (Macedonia: Army Suspends Operations In Kumanovo-Lipkovo) June 11 3. Even the citation used for an "NLA Victory" states that the village was shelled daily at least up until 19th of June

No citations actually claim NLA victory The JSTOR book citation is (https://www.jstor.org/stable/24919730?seq=11#metadata_info_tab_contents) and claims successful NLA operations in Kumanovo, but this is BEFORE the Vaksince operation, this book also claims a decisive Macedonian victory in Radusha but the SAME author deletes it. The citation that says that the Macedonian forces were retreating by June 5th is an Albanian source from Iso Rusi an unofficial spokesmen of the NLA

The article also states that "Macedonian propaganda" about the NLA using the civilians as human shields was disproven as propaganda as a matter of fact. The only citation is a German newspaper quoting an Albanian woman. Despite this several citations which were removed clearly stated that it was impossible to tell who kept the civilians there and that even if they did so voluntarily they still served as human shields. And this still prevented a Macedonian offensive.

In both cases the Macedonian army was not allowed to conduct military action against the insurgents due to pressure from NATO in order to find a political solution to the conflict.

>https://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/06/07/macedonia.riot.02/index.html

"Robertson also called for restraint from Macedonia, while stopping short of urging the government not to declare a state of war. "I also encourage the government in Skopje to persevere in its two-tack approach of engaging an effective political dialogue while using necessary and proportionate military force," he said."

"They were persuaded not to do it by the Western powers who said it would alienate ethnic Albanians and complicate the search for peace."

The result should at best be inconclusive.

Radusha

This article also gets vandalized, the article uses a JSTOR citation that clearly states that the Macedonian Army was victorious in the battle, despite this I in good faith have not changed the result to Macedonian victory and it remains "Ohrid Framework Agreement" the issue is the supposed capture of Radusha which no citations except an interview with an NLA commander express. The outpost and army barracks were captured which i have added to the result.

The same editor who vandalizes this page removed the Macedonian claim for Albanian casualties stating they are "unreliable" and replaced them with Albanian NLA claims, previously both NLA and Macedonian claims were present now only the Albanian claims and most importantly without the (NLA claim) in brackets. That same editor had previously without a single citation changed the result to "NLA victory" and claimed in the * that the NLA captured Radusha and Kuckovo and that 2000 Macedonian soldiers were present, no citations were provided even when i asked for them. The only citation that says the NLA captured Radusha is from the original entry of the NLA in Radusha in July which was then retaken by the Macedonian Security forces as evidenced by the NLA offensives in Radusha that attacked the Macedonian outposts in the village.

I aplogize for this long text but its been months without any sort of improvement, vandalism and edit wars are daily and citations are routinely dismissed out of hand without any dialogue, text or even an attempt at a concensus, i have constantly and in good faith edited articles with citations and gave the other editors the benefit of the doubt, but the other editors routinely invented and add unsupported claims and use sources that mention battles months previously than what the articles are about.

GoofyGoofyson (talk) 12:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Belligerents
Hello. I'm starting this thread because NATO's status as a belligerent has been repeatedly challenged for a while now. Since there are editors who insist on adding it as a belligerent and editors who object, it'd be more productive to discuss it here and try to reach a common understanding, instead of repeatedly disputing it over edits. I'm inviting you all to discuss it here. StephenMacky1 (talk) 16:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)


 * @Albanian 7 @Based.shqiptar.frompirok Please discuss disputed content here. StephenMacky1 (talk) 13:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Al-Qaeda involvement
the sources in which you reference to, do not state that the NLA had direct links to Al-Qaeda or were supported by them. reference 1, points out FYROM media and FYROM state security portraying the NLA as being associated with mujahids and al-Qaeda however it goes as far as to debunk some of these claims. source two and three do not say the NLA was associated with al-Qaeda instead it talks about al-Qaeda recruitment in the Balkans. the third source mentions al-Qaeda only with the Bosnian war. Durraz0 (talk) 17:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Discussions start because there are disputes about the interpretation of bibliography. If an editor adds content which isn't discussed in bibliography, remove it. --Maleschreiber (talk) 17:25, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I do not find where in the cited sources is provided the info, Al-Qaeda supported directly and deliberately UCK, military or in another way. Jingiby (talk) 19:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * First of all by Prespa Agreement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prespa_agreement) there is no such thing as "FYROM" so please refer with the official country name and I'll respond to you. Thanks! --ButtersIO (talk) 19:46, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The cited sources don't discuss links to al-Qaeda. The source which discusses in detail narratives about al-Qaeda in Macedonia writes:


 * --Maleschreiber (talk) 20:33, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I don't understand why are you trying so hard to hide the facts and change the truth when I marked 3 sources with clear evidence of that group involvement in 2001 Conflict in Macedonia by changing the original. In your quotation there is not a clear rejection of collaboration between UCK and al-Qaeda. We must undermine that this was the text with the most sources in the article (3), so here are the texts, proofs and sources:

The most obvious distinction came in the language used to describe the combatants. The Macedonian language media generally spoke of “terrorist attacks”, featuring “fires, looting, torture and terror,” against Macedonian civilians by “terrorists”. In these accounts, Macedonian security forces appear as “defenders of the fatherland” confronting “Albanian terrorist gangs infiltrating from Kosovo and Albania”, assisted by “Mujahedins”, who after 11 September 2001, were recast as “al-Qaeda terrorists”. The message here was that the war was provoked and conducted by terrorists, with assistance from Kosovo. Their aim was to conquer part of Macedonia, drive out all non-Albanians, then partition the territory. As such, they were cast as forces of destruction, hostile to the status quo and established international order. , p. 37

Articles and reports appeared, claiming that the NLA had direct connections with al-Qaeda, that the CIA knew that Osama Bin Laden’s fighters had fought with Albanian terrorists in Macedonia, Kosovo and Albania, and that NLA leader Ali Ahmeti had accepted money from Osama Bin Laden via Sali Berisha, the former president of Albania. One of the most emotive claims was that al-Qaeda terrorists had carried out a massacre of eight soldiers and policemen near the village of Vejce on 28 April 2001. The Macedonian language media broadcast ministry of interior statements claiming that “the intelligence service possesses footage showing Mujahedin activities in Macedonia”, while daily newspapers published photos of Mujahedin fighters allegedly taken in Macedonia. , p.41

Israel military intelligence sources were quoted claiming that al-Qaeda terrorists from Bosnia, Kosovo, Albania and Macedonia had been ordered to open asecond Islamic front against the USA in the Balkans., p.41

At the end of October 2001, the Macedonian language media widely quoted a story from the British Independent newspaper, reporting that Interpol had discovered links between al-Qaeda, the Albanian mafia, and Albanian terrorists in Macedonia., p.41

'''In Albania, terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda, the Algerian Islamic Salvation Front (FIS), the Islamic Armed Group (GIA), and Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) infiltrated the country and used charities to raise and distribute funds. In relation to the war in Kosovo, a conference of Islamic organizations resolved to regard the Muslim Albanians strugles for independence as a Jihad. According to various sources, during the conflict in Macedonia, the ranks of the National Liberation Army (NLA) included approximately 150 Mujahidin from Albania, Bosnia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan, all of whom participated in the fighting.59''', p. 46

'''The presence of active fundamentalists in Macedonia brought the attention of experts on terrorism and raised concerns of wider international community. The reaction came in 2004 when French terrorism experts of the European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center revealed that up to one hundred fundamentalists linked to terrorist organizations were operating in Macedonia. In addition, Monique claimed that al-Qaeda had financial links with local crime and accused Zenun Berisha, the chief mufti at that time, of supporting radical Islam and appointing fundamentalists to positions in mosques and the administration of the Islamic Community of Macedonia (IVZ).70''', p.37

The IIRO collected and provided around $2 million for the people of Kosovo.98 It is unknown how much of these funds were diverged to Macedonia, and for what purposes. In 2003, it was confirmed that IIRO actively supported the worldwide activities of al-Qaeda.99 However, IIRO reopened its office in Tetovo, north-west Macedonia., p.61

'''There are many songs posted on the Internet about Bin Laden and alQaeda, often in Arabic language. However, in August 2010 an online music video devoted to Osama bin Laden was registered and aired for the first time, in Albanian language, on an Islamic forum. The short video shows a group of men celebrating alQaeda’s war against the West, they sing “Oh Osama, annihilate the American army. Oh Osama, raise the Muslims honor. I September 2001 you conquered a power. We all pray for you.” The author and poster of this video are unknown. Representatives from IVZ were aware of the video, and expressed their belief that it was created by Wahhabi groups controlling several Skopje mosques.108 Irrespective of the author, the video is promotes jihad and glorifies Bin Laden and al-Qaeda. The language of the video clearly identifies that Albanians are the intended audience; the video aims to recruit Albanian Muslims for the jihad.''', p. 49-50

The Bosnian Embassy in Vienna issued a passport to bin Laden in 1993, according to various reports in the Yugoslav press at the time. The reports add that bin Laden then visited a terrorist camp in Zenica, Bosnia, in 1994." -- "Al-Qaeda's Balkan Links" by Marcia Christoff Kurop, published in "The Wall Street Journal Europe" on 1 November.

"By 1994, major Balkan terrorist training camps included Zenica, and Malisevo and Mitrovica in Kosovo. Elaborate command-and-control centers were further established in Croatia, and Tetovo, Macedonia, as well as around Sofia, Bulgaria, according to the U.S. Congress's task force on terrorism. In Albania, the main training camp included even the property of former Albanian premier [editor's note: he was president] Sali Berisha in Tropje [editor's note: Tropoja?], Albania, who was then very close to the Kosovo Liberation Army. --ButtersIO (talk) 15:59, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


 * none of us are trying to hide any facts. your bibliography literally states that the North-Macedonian media tried to portray the NLA as being supported by the al-Qaeda without any proof. al-Qaeda trying to recruit ethnic Albanians in 2010 does not mean al-Qaeda supported the NLA in 2001. "terrorist" camps in Kosovo and Albania in 1994 does not mean the NLA was supported by al-Qaeda in 2001. Durraz0 (talk) 16:10, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I've literally shared the proofs above, you just need to read them, what more can I say if you don't want to accept the facts. I am genuinely honest while you are trying to prove me that white is black. Do you have some official denial from UCK about their support by al-Qaeda? --ButtersIO (talk) 17:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You should read carefully the cited bibliography. It doesn't discuss such links. --Maleschreiber (talk) 17:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I read it and it does, here I would add one more and last source not by English, Swiss or Macedonian organisations, but by Greeks, reminder that N.Macedonia and Greece had really bad relationship back in early 00s so this couldn't be any more unbiased. The truth is that you want to deny the fact while everyone here and in this region know the truth, deal with that it had been past, that doesn't mean that all Albanians are al-Qaeda supporters today. So after 4 sources (most by far in this article) if you revert the original again I would report that to admins. Meanwhile you didn't add a single fact about the case. "'An examination of the presence of Islamic terrorism in Albania will follow. Emphasis will be given to Osama bin Laden’s visit to the country, al-Qaeda’s locally planned targets and to Albania’s most recent reform measures relating to international efforts against terrorism. We will then turn to Kosovo and the alleged links of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) to Islamic terrorism. Various claims will be evaluated and the nature and goals of the organization dissected. Turning to FYROM, the National Liberation Army’s (NLA) connection to terrorism will be assessed in a similar manner. It will emerge that although mujahedin fighters did participate in both the KLA and NLA, these organizations were primarily nationalist and irredentist in character lacking any significant jihadi dimension.'" --ButtersIO (talk) 18:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * an assumption that foreign mujahideen's might have joined the NLA does not equivilate the NLA being supported by al-Qaeda. none your sources state this as factual. Durraz0 (talk) 18:05, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok are you trolling or what, it doesn't say that "might have joined" but "'mujahedin fighters did participate in both the KLA and NLA'". I don't know what to say anymore it's like talking to a wall. --ButtersIO (talk) 18:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


 *  can't be translated to al-Qaeda supported the NLA in any shape or form.--Maleschreiber (talk) 18:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So you are saying that 150 mujahedeen participating in a war "can't be translated to al-Qaeda supported the NLA". Wow, then at least add the number of 150 and don't delete the whole paragraph with sources etc. and  please check this out. --ButtersIO (talk) 18:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes. a mujahid is someone who fights for Islam/Allah. al-Qaeda is an organization, the assumption that there might have been some mujahids among the ranks of the NLA do to 150 mujahids fighting in Kosovo 2 years prior, does not mean that NLA was supported by al-Qaeda. Durraz0 (talk) 18:33, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I checked the source of UCK casualties and it's just a self reported number, not an official one "The former political and military leadership of the ethnic Albanian National Liberation Army (NLA) claims their losses up to the present amount to 64 fighters having lost their lives since the incident in Tanusevac last February." --ButtersIO (talk) 18:43, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * this discussion is about alleged al-Qaeda involvement, not casualties. Durraz0 (talk) 08:15, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Edison18273, I'd like to give my imput on this, especially with the given sources. First of all, al-Qaeda most likely did not participate in this conflict. That does not mean that Mujahedeens did not participate in the conflict. The most quoted source in this talk has been "The 2001 Conflict in FYROM: Reflections", which is contradicting itself - on p.19-20 it states: According to the assessments of foreign and domestic military analysts the total number of NLA fighters was not more than two or three thousand, and the brigades were most numerous just before the end of the conflict in the second half of 2001. Among them were a few hundred so-called “dogs of war”, who had gained experience at the fronts in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. Most were Kosovars, former or current members of the Kosovo Protection Corps, KPC, who had been trained and armed by foreign advisors before and during NATO’s war against Milosevic’s regime. They also included a group of Mujahedins who had been in the Balkans for a long time. These extremist formations were highly mobile, equipped with sophisticated western arms. They were the most dangerous adversaries for the Macedonian security forces but they also intimidated those Albanians in the occupied parts of Macedonia who did not agree with the NLA goals or methods. The same source also states: 

It clearly contradicts itself. However, the presence of Mujahadeen has been confirmed by other sources, including the number which has been floating around (150) is present in other sources too, such as and. Actually, the second source I've listed ("The spread of Islamic extremism in the Republic of Macedonia") quotes Shaul Shray and his book "Islamic Terror and the Balkans" p.114 on the number and involvement of Mujahadeen during the 2001 conflict. The editorial board of the "Research Institute for European and American studies" of Greece reccomends his book.

I am inclined to believe that they must be mentioned in the infobox, as a sub-part of the NLA (the edit which you reversed). Also they should be mentioned in "Strenght" category, with the number being the estimation of around 150 Mujahadeen.

I hope that other editors will also voice their opionion on this topic. Kluche (talk) 21:51, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree. There are several sources talking about these fighters and no convincing arguments as to why we should not mention them. Alaexis¿question? 11:29, 5 February 2023 (UTC)