Talk:Battle of Kosovo/Archive 2

Macedonian Serbs
Please provide a valid source that "Macedonian Serbs" (Serbs living in Macedonia) fought with the Ottoman Empire in the Battle of Kosovo or it will be deleted Maktruth (talk) 23:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Again, please provide a valid source or the statement will be deleted. Maktruth (talk) 01:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Albanians,Wallachians and Macedonian Serbs in Belligerents should be deleted... Man who introduced albanians,wallachians and macedonian serbs into article is our new wikipedia history maker.STOP REVERTING HISTORY!

The Albanians and Wallachians also allies of Serbian-Bosnian army, inasmuch as also them was to threaten the Ottoman Empire, hence was helped of prince Lazar. Contrarily some serbian voivod in North-Macedonia helped Sultan Murath (the 8,000 vassal is the Macedonian Serbs). (Reference: Attila and Balázs Weiszhár: Lexicon of Wars, 2004 ISBN 9789639471252, and Small Lexicon of the Battles, 2000. ISBN 963 547 189 0 Doncsecz (talk) 13:50, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Watta hell is going on here? What Albanians, who wrote this? Maybe there were 2 or 3 Albanians in the battle, and they were there probably just to sell popcorn or something like that. Albanians fighting alongside Serbs in the Battle of Kosovo... Goddamnit, that's the stupidest thing i've heard. --Baks (talk) 12:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Macedonian Serbs are possibly a reference to Dejanovic, a Serb noble who (had to) help Turkish army. To my knowledge he helped it only logistically, and if he supplied it with men, their numbers must have been very small. Also, right, number of Albanians or Vlachs in Serbian army was minuscule. Nikola (talk) 19:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Serbian-Bosnian-Wallachian-Albanian Coalition
For god's sake, the albanians and wallachians helped Serbia againts the Ottomans. In Battle of Nicopolis numbers was helped the hungarian king, because horrendously strong the Ottoman Empire. Albania was be in for the Ottoman Empire. Please, this is not adulteration of history, and for this have nothing to do with the Kosovo State. Doncsecz (talk) 13:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, no, no signifficant number of Albanians or Vlachs participated in the battle. Nikola (talk) 19:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Albeit this is sound, however in the Battle of Grünwald the moldavian ruler Alexander altogether was attend with 1000 soldier (and he met some serbian valiant), contrarily the polish, german, hungarian and other historian books in sy's opinion Moldavia was powers at the polish-teutonic war. Doncsecz (talk) 10:28, 7 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Everything what you should do is to read Wikipedia "Battle of Kosovo article"...There is not one single place where you can read anything about albanian or wallachian army (their leaders,why they fought in the battle,about their numbers)... Macedonian Serbs on Ottoman side??hmm... Konstantin Dejanovic was serbian ruler in Macedonia and he allowed ottomans to cross his lands...As far as I know not significant number of his troops fought agains Lazar's army on Kosovo field. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Damjanoviczarko (talk • contribs) 21:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The Great hungarian historic book (javascript:open_image_viewer('935984',1);/The History of Hungary book-series in the 1980s years) write: serbian voivods of Macedonia was he allowed Murath's army and some thousand serbian valiant helped the Ottomans (mereover bulgarians and greeks, such a scout Evremos Bey). Lazar's army consists serbian and bosnian forces, together with albanian and wallachian aideunits, but he met a number of valiant in Poland, Zeta (Montenegro), Hungary, Bulgaria, Croatia, etc. Doncsecz (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Well I can give you about ten or more serbian (and not only serbian) books where there is nothing about albanian or wallachian participation in the Battle of Kosovo. Why this hungarian book is so important and so reliable about Kosovo battle...


 * The Great Hungarian historic book is a great number document expend, among other tings serbian, ottoman, polish, bizantine etc. chronicles. These references enumerate in the end of the book. Doncsecz (talk) 10:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * OK if you are so sure about albanian and vlach participation then find something about their battle commanders and number of their troops that were involved into the battle and write this into the army composition part... It is so stupid that in army composition there is absolutely nothing about vlachs or albanians and that their names are in battle Belligerents. Farewell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Damjanoviczarko (talk • contribs) 10:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

It was an Ottoman victory
Hi there, let me state my BIAS so that everyone knows what I believe. I am a Christian, and I love the Serbs and everything they did for Europe. BUT this was an Ottoman victory without a doubt. In every book that I have read, from Stephen Turnbull, to R G Grant, Norwich to Cyril Mango have always used Kosovo 1389 as a decisive Ottoman victory and the end of a single threat to the Turks. From that day onwards, the Turks only single opponent able to defeat them by themselves was the Hungarians, who often needed vassal help. The rest of the Balkan peoples had to form unstable loose coalitions. I have cited four well known and academic writers, this is an Ottoman victory

The loss of one man, even if he be the Sultan, does not change the fact that the Ottomans destroyed Serbian power. What is important to note is the massive loss in the upper classes of the Serbs as well as the loss in manpower.  Gabr-  el  20:09, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

No. It was not decisive victory for the Turks. I think that we found great solution for the problem. Battle result is explained correctly in the aftermath. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Damjanoviczarko (talk • contribs) 20:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

The one who killed Murad I was Albanian
This is not NPOV —Preceding unsigned comment added by Getoar (talk • contribs) 22:58, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I find the information given on the page very corrupted. The Battle of Kosova/Kosovo is not an exclusive battle of Serbs against Ottoman Empire. There was a coalition formed among Balkans people. Christian nations such as Albanians, Serbs, Bulgarians and Romanians fought against the Turkish army in Kosova Field close to Prishtina (June 15, 1389).

Leader of coalition troops was the Serb Lazar Hrebeljanovic, while he was supported by the Albanian noblemen Gjergj II Balsha, Teodor Muzaka, Gjon Kastrioti (Gjergj Kastrioti’s father) etc.

It is said, in the article, that Ottomans outnumbered the Christian soldiers, but no numbers are mentioned. However, it was a battle between 100.000 Ottomans and 40.000 Balkanians. The numbers I have given are not fantastic, but real.

Meanwhile, Milos Obilic appears to be a Serb according to Wikipedia, but he was Albanian with the real name Millosh Kopili. Kopil/Kopili (definite/undefinite) means bastard in Albanian, but it is used to describe outstanding skills as well.

P.S. Don’t forget that the battle was carried through in Albanian land (Kosova). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Getoar (talk • contribs) 00:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC)


 * One, Kosovo in the 14th century was hardly Albanian land, seeing as how it was inhabited by something like 90% Slavs (Christian and Muslim). Two, the figures you mention are in the realm of fantastic for a 14th century battle - as a point of comparison, the Battle of Agincourt was fought by 20,000 soldiers on both sides combined. Three, if Milos Obilic was really an Albanian hero, why would Kosovar Albanians deface and topple his statue in the town which bears his name? --tracer_bullet 14:52, August 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * HA HA
 * Yeah, I am sorry, I just cant find an inch of proof that Milos Obilic was an albanian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.222.199.62 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Kosova is Albanian Land

Dear tracer_bullet,

1. The most important point. Who is autochthonous in Balkans? Serbs who came from the Carpathians in the 6th century or Albanians (Illyrians) who have always lived in Balkans?

Kosova (ancient Dardania) was inhabited by Dardani, the Illyrian tribe, even mentioned by Homerus. Maenwhile, the presence of Slavs in Kosova is proven in late 12th century (two last decades). Stefan Nemanja invaded northern Albania (Dardania) because Albanians confessed the Catholicism. Their aim was colonization of Dardania and conversion of the population from Roman Catholic to Serbian Orthodox.

2. Mate! The numbers I have given are not fantastic, but real. E.g. in the Battle of Albulena (Albania, 1457) 80.000 soldiers under the command of Isak Bey Evrenoz were defeated by the Albanian Kingdom forces.

The Byzantine chronicler Laonik Halkokondili wrote: “Murad I gathered his entire army, from Asia and Europe, 100.000 soldiers, and together with his son Mehmed II led his troops to Albania (May 1450)”. (First siege of Kruja).

Mehmed II had even a bigger army (150.000) in Kruja’s second siege.

3. If you say that Albanians demolished Obilic’s statue it is due to the hate for the Serbs who did it according to their style. On the other hand, I can even find you iliteral men and women over 90s who know the entire Albanian legend for the Battle of Kosova. They have been conducting it from generation to generation (Albanian: brez pas brezi). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Getoar (talk • contribs) 13:40, 25 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Yeah, Albanian land where Serbian capital and seat of the Serbian Orthodox Church were located, and which had 99% Serbian population.


 * The oldest sources mention Milos's name as "Kobilovic", which comes from Serbian "kobila" - mare. Even if it was Kopili, Kopile means bastard in Serbian as well, so it's irrelevant. Nikola 10:06, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Mate, you have to understand that even Paris was one of the biggest German cities during the World War II. If the capital of Serbia was in Kosova (Prishtina or whatever) it doesn't mean that all the population was Slavic. Just remember of the Albanian catholic bishop Pjetër Bogdani who died in Prishtina. He was one of the greatest leaders on anti-Ottoman movements, in the time your Slavic ancestors were the best allies to the Turks. Thus, Albanians have always comprised a majority in Kosova up to Nis. Remember, 1877-1878 and the holocaust, when 160.000 Albanians were deported by force from their homes in the region of Nis, and forced to live in the central Kosova. There are people who still have the documents for the land legally owned and this will get you into trouble one day. God will punish those who want someone else’s bread.--Getoar 13:44, 25 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Mate, you have to understand that people who live in Serbia generally can see through such a pile of lies and recognise that it is completely bogus. Nikola 15:07, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Can you please tell me then, based on historical facts, how Kosovo with 99% Serbs became Kosova with 95% Albanians? (I know your answer, but just want to disaprove it) --Getoar 23:56, 26 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Since you know my answer, you may proceed straight do disaproving with it :) Nikola 08:24, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

It has been known that Serbian historians often base the history on myths rather than facts. Then, let me remind you that Slavs came to Balkans between 6th and 9th centuries. And this is away after Illyrians were known to be in Balkans. So, if we use facts rather than fiction, then historically Kosova was always populated by Albanians and not Slavs.

Slavic claims for an Albanian-Ottoman alliance, which deported the nonexistent Slavic population from Kosova, is nothing than a mistake made by Serbian politicians, not very keen on history. Serbians were proven to be strong allies to Ottomans, immediately after the Battle of Kosova, while Albanians did fight even after their last castle fell (1479).

Albanians did not object to the development of Serbian culture in Kosova. This is a similar case to Serbians living in Chicago and developing their culture (building Orthodox Churches). But, it doesn’t grant Serbian people the right to call America their land.--Getoar 03:07, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


 * It has been known that Serbian historians often base the history on myths rather than facts.


 * It has been known that Albanian government in Kosovo creates school curriculum which describes Kosovo's history without any basis in reality and promotes hatred toward Serbs, which shows.


 * Then, let me remind you that Slavs came to Balkans between 6th and 9th centuries. And this is away after Illyrians were known to be in Balkans. So, if we use facts rather than fiction, then historically Kosova was always populated by Albanians and not Slavs.


 * That is wrong, for several reasons. First, it is not so certain that Slavs came to Balkans then, nor that Albanians are Illyrians. However, even if we take these for granted, what you have written still doesn't follow. First, historical sources which assert that, also claim that the land was depopulated (for example De Administrando Imperio: And since what is now Serbia and Pagania and the so-called country of the Zachlumi and Terbounia and the country of the Kanalites were under the dominion of the emperor of the Romans, and since these countries had been made desolate by the Avars (for they had expelled from those parts the Romani who now live in Dalmatia and Dyrrachium), therefore the emperor settled these same Serbs in these countries, and they were subject to the emperor of the Romans). Second, even if the former is not true, it is not established that modern Kosovo Albanians are descendant of those Illyrians who lived in Kosovo.


 * Slavic claims for an Albanian-Ottoman alliance, which deported the nonexistent Slavic population from Kosova,


 * Serbian population in Kosovo was very existent. One of the earliest remaining historical sources about it is Turkish defter (census) of 1455 which recorded 12,985 Serbian houses, 75 Vlach, 46 Albanian, 17 Bulgarian etc. in entire Kosovo. Modern analysis of the defter was done by Muslim researchers from Sarajevo Institute of Middle Eastern Studies.


 * is nothing than a mistake made by Serbian politicians, not very keen on history. Serbians were proven to be strong allies to Ottomans, immediately after the Battle of Kosova,


 * That is not true. After the battle, Lazar's state entered became vassal to Turkey, which is opposite of ally, while other Serb states resisted. Specifically, Montenegro was never actually conquered by Turkey.


 * while Albanians did fight even after their last castle fell (1479).


 * That is nice and true, but after converting to Islam Albanians did become a weapon in Turkish hands, just as after it they were weapon in Austrian, German, Italian and, now, NATO hands. Albanians are the last of Balkans peoples which formed a country for that very reason.


 * Albanians did not object to the development of Serbian culture in Kosova. This is a similar case to Serbians living in Chicago and developing their culture (building Orthodox Churches). But, it doesn’t grant Serbian people the right to call America their land.


 * No it isn't. While there are Serbian churches in Chicago, as expected, the largest modern Serbian church is Temple of Saint Sava in Belgrade, the Serbian capital. In the same way, from the fact that the largest, beautiest and most important medieval Serbian churches were in Kosovo, we can tell that it was core of the Serbian state in middle ages. In addition, there are no Albanian churches in Kosovo. Furthermore, not only churches, but Serbian capital was in Kosovo; if it was not inhabited by Serbs, that would be a unique example in history of a country moving its capital from its core territory to a border territory to a territory settled with a foreign people. Imagine USA moving its capital from Washington to Bagdad or Germany from Berlin to Kiev, and you can imagine that Kosovo was Albanian-inhabited when capital of Serbia was moved to Prizren.


 * What's the name of your village, and what does it mean? Nikola 22:36, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


 * As I understand the problem is wether the place where the battle was fought was inhabited with Servs or Albanians. Can´t we conclude that their is no clear consensus on that topic?
 * NB people, let's respect each other's opinion. References to WWII and 19e century holocausts are not relevant for this issue and only help to enflame others!
 * --Scafloc 12:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

How and When Kosovo lost its Serb Majority
There are several references on this discussion page to the question of how Kosovo, a place which is central to Serbian identity due to the 1389 battle, lost its Serbian population. An interesting question, and one which has a happily simple answer. Hopefully knowing the answer will put an end to some of the innuendo I see on both sides here...

It all dates back to the late 17th century (1600s), and the wars between the Hapsburg (Austrian) empire and the Ottomans. According to Donald Quataert's excellent history of the Ottoman empire, "To escape the fighting, Orthodox Serbs migrated from their homes around Kosovo...in an intermittent stream northward. Until then, the Kosovo area had been heavily Serb but after they left, Albanians gradually migrated in, filling the empty spaces. Some Serbs moved into eastern Bosnia, where, consequently, a Muslim majority gave way to an important Christian presence." (The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922, p. 117)

Voila the answer to the arguments here, and an important background to the Bosnia and Kosovo crises of the 1990s.

Ottoman frontier provinces often saw this kind of mass migration of subsidiary populations, especially "untrustworthy" subsidiary populations, during times of conflict and decline. The most striking example, of course, is the mass deportation of Eastern Orthodox Armenians from the frontier with Eastern Orthodox Russia at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century. We all know how that one ended.

Happily, the key to the Kosovo/Serb conundrum is not nearly as blood-drenched.jackbrown 13:17, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

The myth
The current slaughter in the former Yugoslavia began under the sign of a myth about a battle fought 600 years ago. In 1389 at the Battle of Kosovo Field a multinational Christian force was defeated by its Ottoman foe. This was part of the expansion of the Ottoman Empire that eventually spent itself at the gates of Vienna some three centuries later. What actually happened in the Battle of Kosovo is a matter of dispute. But its importance to all the people of the region is undeniable: Bosnians, Serbs and Albanians all commemorate it in their folk songs. Yet it was only the Serbs who turned the defeat on Kosovo Field into a powerful national myth. This happened in the second half of the nineteenth century when Serbia became an internationally recognized kingdom and was able to contemplate the ‘liberation of ancestral lands’ – the sandjak of Novi Pazar, Kosovo, Macedonia – from Ottoman rule. Since much of this territory was inhabited by non-Serbs, it was necessary to reinterpret the Kosovo battle as an exclusively Ottoman-Serb affair. The aim was to present the Albanians in particular, ethnically dominant throughout the Kosovo region, as usurpers of Serbian historic territory. They were portrayed as a ‘people without history’: a barbarian tribe genetically incapable of cultural or political development. Serb-Albanian conflict was thus built into the very foundation of the Kosovo myth. Indeed, from its early days the Serbian state practised a policy of mass expulsion and/or forced assimilation of non-Serb populations, thereby turning an ethnically heterogeneous region into a homogeneous Serb one.

Ref; For the power of this myth among Serb peasants-turned-soldiers during the Balkan Wars see the account given by Leon Trotsky in his Balkan Wars 1911-12, New York 1980. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.24.241.219 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

battle of the Field of Kosova: a reasonable look on it
There is written proof of the Serbian population in Kosovo since the XI century, meanwhile it is grown in number in the following centuries when Kosovo became part of the Nemanjide state, but nevertheless never overflowing the Albanian ethnic population. And it was in the territory of the Arber population that the Battle of Kosova was fought. (28-th of June 1389). This was the biggest struggle of the Balkans to resist the Osman expansion into their territories. And to save their lands they let aside all skirmishes, and united themselves under the Serbian Prince Lazar Hreblamoviq. The serious accomplishment, the great number of the combating armies, the results and the consequences made this battle enter into all historical annals of the time, and also gave birth to one of the most wonderful cycles of the Balkan epic. Leading to that war were different reasons, the biggest we may assume was the Osman want to grow larger, but the occasion was given by the Serbian leader Lazar and the Albanian Prince Gjergj II Balsha. During their Balkan campaign the turks entered Serbia and conquered Nish. In 1386 King Lazar fearing the Osman army accepted not to fight but to pay tribute to the sultan Murat, but soon after he didn't keep his promise. When Gjergj II Balsha was seeing his territory( Shkodra, Drisht, Ulqin and Tivar) was becoming every day smaller, he accepted to enter under Turkish vasality. Balsha had married the doughter of King Lazar. And so on summer 1388 he was allied with his father-in-law and King Tvertko of Bosnia and together they won the battle of Bileqe. So “it became necessary for the Osman empire to vendicate the soldiers killed and to liquidate the intrigues of the rebels.” And this means that the turks undertook an anti- Balkans campain, and not an anti Serbian one. So when Sultan Murat was waiting spring on Plovdiv, the Balkan lords, King Lazar Hreblanoviq of Serbia, Gjergj II Balsha of Shkodra, Vuk Brankoviq the ruler of Kosova, and many others gathered and planed the resistance. The battle was planned to take place on the Arber Lands of Kosovo, since ther was space enough for those big armies, and because it was the crocevia of the Balkans, there encontered all the roads to further enter the inner Balkans. One Osman cronist of the time tells that the Sultan with an army of 50000-60000 soldiers was prepared to fight. He had called on arms all his vassals, and help had arrived to him even from the Persians and Arabs. Meanwhile in the other side were gathered all the interested parties. The Serbs, the Albanians, the Bosnians, the Romanians, the Checs, the Hungarians, the Polish, the French, meanwhile other sources name only the Serbs, the Albanians and Bosnians with their other allies. Leading the coalition army were on the center King Lazar, on the right Vuk Brnakoviq and on the left the Bosnian noble Vlatko Vukoviq and the Albanian Dhimitër Jonima, lord of Lezha and Kurbin. In this way we see that the albanians were placed on the right and on the left of the formations, in the way that those leaded by their leaders to the left with the Bosnians, and others to the right under Vuk Brankoviq. With these ones must have been placed even the Albanian Millosh Kopiliqi, who'd give another turn to the battle. Based on the Serbian epic, Gjergj II Balsha was present with an army of 6000 thousand men, and other Albanian lords and princes were present too. To name some of them is the Despot of Berat Theodhori II Muzaka, and Gjergj Kastrioti, lord of Mat, grandfather of the Albanian national hero. It is worth noting the presence of Albanian lords from down to the lands of Himara and Epir. The battle started the morning of 28-th of june 1389, and at the end both the leadres of the armies, Murat and Lazar, were killed. On the albanian part the illustrious dead were Theodori II Muzaka and the baron from Drenica who killed the Sultan, Milosh Kopiliqi. After Sultan was dead, his son Bajazit retired to Ederne to secure his post, and it gave the impression that the war was won by the coalition, seen this on the letter that Tvertko, king of Bosnia, sent to the town of Trogir on 1-st of august 1389, but the reality was in fact different. The Balkans after that battle were one after another put under the Osman empire, and they had to revive after a long time. then there are some points we have tomade when talkin about history: nation, the thing we understand today is relatively a new concept, and as so it has not existed at the time. the people under the king of Serbia were Serbs, whatever the language they used. and i muat say, from experience, than when u leave people do, they mingle and twingle together at that point that u can't distinguish whi was who. we can not talk about a story happening centuries before with the same language we use today. albanians there were in the battle, as in every battle, fought in between Gibraltar and Nepal, and were in both sides, like the serbs i'd say. but when talking about the history of europe and it's resistence to turks, we must accept one fair single thing, that the albanians fought the turks at least 100 times more than the serbs. you wnat proof, here it is, u consult whatever dictionary, whatevere really historical source, and confirm it. thank you. and i read a comment on village names in albania, yeah, there are a lot of serbian names in Albania, since albanians have never been racists, and have never hated the neighbours. and fortunately they still do not hate anybody. they never claimed an albanian orthodox church to be serbian. because, strange u did not note that the albanians have been a mojority of orthodoxes, like the Komnens, which for a case were from Albania, like Constandine the Great was from Dardania. changing names does not change history, u had to accomplish the ethnic cleansing to have Dardania (Kosovo)yours. and has to destroy all the Balkan tradition. and say it is all Serbian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shkinak (talk • contribs) 21:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunatelly non of the things here can't be corroborated by the contemporary sources, only one who mentions several Albanian princes ( Muzaki, Jonima etc ) at the battle of Kosovo is Chronicle of John Musachi written in 1515. unfortunately it's written in Italy whole 126 years after the battle so it can't be considered as relevant source, also it's very tendentious ( aimed at glorification of Musachi family ) to be considered reliable. As for Đurađ II Balšić, he as well as whole family of Balšič were Serbs of Vlach origine ( with name Balša being recorded solely in Serbia and Romania ) not the Albanians, not to mention that his participation in the battle is also reported solely in Musachi's fiction work and that Đurađ was Ottoman vassal at that time. Same goes for Miloš Oblilić, who's surname is first and only recorded as Kobilić or Kobilović, that is  son of the mare  which definitely suits better to knight then  bastard . By the way Serbian word for bastard is kopile as well if you are already trying to use childish language constructions to prove something. To continue, your paragraph is wrong from the beginning, the Albanians were first time recorded in area of Kosovo and Metohija around 1350. when 9 katuns ( migratory shepherd communities ) were settled north of Prizren. Anyway there's nothing to discuss here, even the most pro-Albanian propagandists such as Judah, Malcolm and Vickers state that Albanians moved to areas of Kosovo in Metohija after the Ottoman conquest, most specifically after the great Serbian migration in 1690. I suggest you to go to the albanian history sight, there are all mediaeval sources that mention Albanians gathered there at, believe it or not, but NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM mentions Albanians living in Kosovo although there are several descriptions of Albania there such as Description of eastern Europe from 1308. and Initiative for Making the Passage from 1332. Those things are corroborated by Turkish census of land of Branković from 1455. which lists all adult male inhabitants of the Kosovo area ( that's Kosovo without Metohija ) by they birth name and father's name, surprisingly all those names are Serbian, again no Albanians. Anyway as I said read the Judah, Malcolm and Vickers and they all more or less confirm my statement, and those people are main western lobbyists of Albania and independent Kosovo . Now after all we see that you have no reliable sources nor literature to back your claims which are, surprisingly, elaborated in the same way at the Greater Albania forum, the place where Albanians can tell fairy tales to each other unmolested by the objective people. --Clanedstino (talk) 18:41, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Please Do not make any changes, write to the Discussion first
it seems some people don't like the 'outcome' part of this article and change it frequently. though I believe it was an ottoman victory, it is not nice to change text like that. I hope we can find a way to warn people when they open this article. Some Serbian colleagues claim it to be a draw, therefore I believe we should do some voting. what do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.133.129.16 (talk • contribs) 12:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree,we should vote. And please sign your comments.Lysandros 14:08, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * As far as I'm aware, the result of the battle is commonly considered a draw. I've read numerous Western accounts of a draw, which they contrast with the "Serb nationalist" "myth of defeat". Serbia's power was largely exhausted, however, while the Ottomans had huge manpower reserves they could call upon. Even so, the rest of Serbia held out for 70 years after this battle - hardly indicating an Ottoman victory at this battle. --estavisti 17:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Huge manpower reserves? Please cite neutral sources for your claim.--Doktor Gonzo 15:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry but the result of this battle is not 'commonly' considered a draw.The majority of the valuable western sources claim Ottoman victory.See Encyclopedia Brittannica,Columbia,Encarta and others...We can not ignore all of them.Lysandros 19:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Fine, let's do the voting then. By the way, I don't think it is a draw.Ati7 06:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It was a draw that devastated the Serbs but only postponed the Ottoman conquest. That's my vote. Regards.--Doktor Gonzo 15:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Straw Poll: Is the result of this battle a Draw?
Agree
 * A Turkish withdrawal countered with irreplaceable losses. Neither side gained anything from the battle. Don't confuse this battle with the overall conquest. Remember, this battle came 70 years prior to the Turkish conquest. Хајдук Еру   ( Talk  ||  Cont ) 07:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Setis (talk) 11:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It is perhaps a strategic ottoman victory but hardly a tactical one. At best it is a tactical stalemate. Suggest you review the linked article below.

The Battle of Kosovo: Early Reports of Victory and Defeat

by Thomas A. Emmert —Preceding unsigned comment added by Setis (talk • contribs) 11:44, 14 February 2010 (UTC) link title Setis (talk) 11:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Disagree
 * Lysandros 00:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Though Ottomans didn't make progress right after the battle into Serbia, this battle effectively ended any resistance to the conquest. As a result, 'most' of Serbia is conquered in the coming years, not 70 years later. therefore it must be a victory. Ati7 09:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Other

Serbian phyrric victory/ Draw
yes, Serbia lost her king and much of her nobility and troops but the SHORT TERM goal was achieved and that was halting Ottoman advance. They lost a huge army on Kosovo too and it should at least be a Draw because both kings were slaughtered and both armies decimated. But the Serbian objective was completed and since the short term goal was achieved it should be listed a PHYRRIC Serbian victory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.157.86 (talk) 23:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Your opinion does not matter. And before you say it, my opinion doesn't doesn't matter either.  I realize it's a little late, but I wanted to point that out.


 * We need sources cited to back up that it was a Pyrrhic victory (henceforth, "PV") for anybody if the article is to state that. There are several sources already listed that state it was an Ottoman victory- not that it was a PV (for Turks or Serbs).  So that is what the article says.  Sources matter; editors' opinions do not.  Cheers! --DarthBinky (talk) 20:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * List of sources:http://books.google.com/books?q=Battle+of+Kosovo+pyrrhic+Ottoman+victory&as_brr=3
 * I gave a reference that states it was a pyrrhic victory for the Ottoman Empire, although I consider it a temporary fix.
 * As soon as I have some free time, I'll dig through my library and see what my other sources say. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:53, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, Laffin's, Brassey's Dictionary of Battles, p229; Turkish victory
 * Bruce's, Harbottle's Dictionary of Battles, p134, Turks gained a signal victory
 * Dupuy's, The Harper Encyclopedia of Military History, p422, Victory of Murad and his son Bayazid....
 * Three completely neutral sources would appear to trump any other sources. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Battle, by R G Grant also says it was a decisive victory for the Ottomans actually.  Gabr-  el  00:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes but the Turks had their entire army destroyed in order to destroy a smaller army with both sides losing their kings. The Ottomans did lose a huge army the only difference was Serbia couldn't raise a new army of the calibre it lost at Kosovo due to its limited size and resources. The Battle itself was certainly not a clear Ottoman victory considering their huge losses against a significantly smaller force (which was also destroyed). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.157.86 (talk) 21:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Your "opinion" isn't a fact. The neutral sources state it was an Ottoman victory. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Albanians against the Ottomans
I have read here and also heard from many people that the albanians were also fighting against the ottomans. In the belligerents you should add albania. Many orthodox albanians were forced to flee or convert to be muslim and it is important that you clarify this in the article. http://www.albanian.com/v4/showthread.php?t=8470

An anti-Ottoman coalition of Hungarians, Bulgarians, Romanians, Poles, Serbs and ALBANIANS headed by the Serbian  prince Lazar fought a Turkish army twice its size on the plain of Kosova near Pristine on 15 June 1389. Troops of Gjergj II Balsha of Shkodra and of Theodore Korona Muzaka of Berat participated. Even though an Albanian named Milosh Kopiliq penetrated to the Sultanâ€™s tent and assassinated Amurat I, the Turks succeeded in destroying the Balkan coalition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdupont (talk • contribs) 09:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Phyrric victory or just victory
I will just quickly say, in reference to what seems to be an ongoing debate, that whether the battle was a Phyrric victory, just victory, or a tie really depends on how you measure victory. Whether immediate period, short term or long term.

1. In the immediate period the battle was a draw or could even be deemed a Serbian victory as the Turks withdrew from battle/the field which at that point COULD be considered a defeat or a tie.

2. In the short term the battle is a phyrric Ottoman victory as their entrire army is practically destroyed by they have gained a strategic advantage as they have the capability to raise more armies and bring them in from Asia whilst the Serbs and their allies don't.

3. Clear victory can only be seen in the long term as the capability to field more armies allows the Ottoms to slowly encroach on the Balkans and go on to conquest practically the whole Balkans, aside from Dalmatia and arguably Montenegro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.41.142.242 (talk) 09:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

For God's sake Turks had such great losses that they barely won the battle of Kosovo. It is the Pyrrhic victory and I stick to that (Verbatimdat (talk) 22:31, 1 March 2010 (UTC))

Another source
I don't see this being used: Dougweller (talk) 19:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * That source was moved . --Enric Naval (talk) 18:34, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

CAN ALBANIANS STOP SPREADING LIAS HERE

If the Wikipedia is suposed to be neutral and not pro-serbian or pro-albanian,somebody needs to tell it to Albanians.Adress Kosovo as Kosova on your language Wikipedia,and Kosovo on English,and SERBIAN too.Only you use Kosova,so stop confusing people.There were no Albanians at the Batlle of KOSOVO,there were only Serbs in Bosnia. Is Wikipedia neutra lor what????Be neutral and this is part of Serbian culture,so Albanians,stay off. Nationalists talk:SOMEWHERE ELSE,THANK YOU. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.180.29.142 (talk) 22:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Albanians are just taliban converts, who cry coz Serbs stood Christians despite Ottoman rule and Serbs freed themselves while Albanians are celebrating islamic holidays to this day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Verbatimdat (talk • contribs) 14:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

KIA-sign
I restored the crosses behind the dead Ottoman leaders. It might be true that muslims have their own sign, but the old Romans at the Battle of Carrhae and the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest, the greek commander at the Battle of Marathon weren't Christians either. Thus, I see no reason why muslims should be discriminated.Jeff5102 (talk) 10:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC) By the way, see also Dagger (typography).Jeff5102 (talk) 07:23, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If they have their own symbol... what is it? Is it in Unicode? -- Evertype·✆ 17:27, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

alleged Albanians, Poles, Hungarians, Wallachians etc
OK, I have put the references to the two relevant works that clearly state that battle was fought between Serbian and Ottoman forces, John VA Fine is western authority for mediaeval southeastern Europe while Jirecek is authority for both Serbian and Albanian mediaeval history. Any further edit after this will be pure act of vandalism unless someone provides me relevant source about Albanians, Poles etc participating in the battle. Clanedstino —Preceding undated comment added 22:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC).

I was already append to source, that in the battle contend polish and hungarian soldiers, as the sources of Middle Ages in Hungary allude to, that the hungarian king was send knights in Serbia. I not chip on the Albanian-quesition. Doncseczznánje 10:13, 18 December 2009 (UTC) Is that way the same Hungarian king attacked Serbia only 3 months after the battle, in the spirit of the true ally? Not to mention that only 6 years before the battle of Kosovo Serbia and Hungary were in war over the province of Machva.Little illogical don't you think?Clanedstino —Preceding undated comment added 17:04, 18 December 2009 (UTC).

Oh? But what sort of contract to Serbia and Turkey after the battle? Serbia become the vassal of the Ottoman Empire. The Turkish cavalrys yet 1389 dump on South Hungary by way of Serbia. Accordingly Serbia automatically enemy of Hungary. The hungarian knights into the Battle of Kosovo was the allieds of Lazar serbian ruler, and not Števan Lazarevič, that make an oath to Murad, as Lazar dead in the battlefield. Doncseczznánje 19:52, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * See this other wikipedia-article of Lazarevič: Life of Števan Lazarevič. Flag of the Slovene Nation.svg Doncseczznánje 19:55, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Serbia became Ottoman vassal after the Hungarian attack, in fact the Hungarian attack was main reason why Stefan Lazarević accepted Ottoman suzerainty, he didn't feel capable to fight against both Ottomans and Hungarians. Second, why would king Sigismund help Lazar when Lazar supported Angevin candidate for Hungarian throne king Ladislas just as Bosnian king Tvrtko? According to you Sigismund helped allies of his enemy Ladislas right in the middle of the succession war in Hungary, now that's not even illogical but outright laughable. Also I would like you to direct me to Hungarian source that proves that Hungarians participated in battle. Anyway I have a proof that Sigismund didn't even knew about the battle of Kosovo whole three weeks after it, on 7 of July 1389 he gave a plenipotentiary letter to Nikola Garai in which he mentions  nobili viro Wlk wavode, genero magnifici viri Lazari kenezii de Rascia  ( to the noble man duke Vuk ( Branković ), son in law of magnificent man Lazar prince of Serbia ), but in that time Lazar was already dead and the prince of Serbia was Stefan Lazarević, so the Sigismund wasn't aware of both Lazar's death ( otherwise the letter woud say  QUONDAM magnifici viri Lazari kenezii de Rascia  ie  of the LATE magnificent man Lazar etc. ) and Stefan's succession. letter at Raguza és Magyarország összeköttetéseinek oklevéltára. A raguzai állami, a bécsi cs. és kir. titkos és egyéb levéltárakban levö okiratokból összeállitotta Gelcich József. Bevezetéssel és jegyzetekkel ellátta Thallóczy Lajos - Gelcich, József p.113 Clanedstino

The hungarian sources not come to the point, that Lazar was lived or dead afore the battle. Wars between Hungary and the Balkan state was also at the time, but at times this states play down the discordance and of the christian solidarity Žigmond was aid to the Serbs, of course some knights. I not talk to thereof, that the hungarian and polish knights was separate troops. Neither the roman catholic pope was like the Ortodox slav people, but the Ottoman Empire was bigger enemy, accordingly for a while not sound this, that needful beat down the Balkan ortodox people and heretics. Doncseczznánje 10:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok I don't get some of your English, I asked you to direct me to the Hungarian source like I directed you to mine, unless you can prove it all your statements are simple presumptions and theories, all that christian solidarity and fear of Ottomans sounds nice but those are mere fictions, that same Zigmond and Lajos before him had series of wars against Serbia under the parole of fighting AGAINST Serbian schismatics and heretics ie Orthodox, so now suddenly those heretics and schismatics whom he was trying to eradicate some years before became  fellow christians  ? Simply I expect that there is some Hungarian source proving the participation of Hungarians in the battle, the Hungarian source collections are available online in large numbers and I don't think it would be hard to find the necessary source if it exists. PS: in the time of battle of Kosovo Hungary was in war with Poland, it's hard to expect that Sigismund would allow Polish army marching across his entire land to get to Serbia, also there's more than 600 km from Poland to Kosovo field, if Polish troops wanted to participate in battle they would have to march more then month and only God knows that it was logistically close to impossible in Mediaeval times. Also such journey would have to be carefully organized and financed which in turn would leave traces in Polish sources such as accounts, bills, various orders and charters etc however non of them exists. Clanedstino —Preceding undated comment added 13:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC).

There the source: Military history of Hungary (Magyarország hadtörténete). In the internet you not find this book, at most the History of the Hungarian nation (A Magyar Nemzet Története) of Sándor Szilágyi, but this book not contain to the presence of the Hungarians and Poles. Mátyás Szakály hungarian historian also mention the minimal hungarian-serbian, and hungarian-bosnian co-operation. I how often say to: this is not armys, but SOME knight! Albeit Sigismund and Poland was at one time enemys, but later in the Battle of Golubac Hungarian-Bohemian-Lithuanian-Polish armys fight againts the Ottomans! Fancy that! In the english wikipedia not yet, but in the Battle of Muhi was fight Serbian soldier againts the Mongols. Doncseczznánje 19:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

That is not a source, that's a literature, I was thinking about contemporary Hungarian source: meadiaeval chronicle, charter etc OK I see where you are getting at, for instance I know that one Serbian detachment participated in Hungarian army in battle of Kressenbrun in 1260. cause Serbian king Uroš I became Hungarian vassal shortly before the battle, for Muhi I doubt there was Serbs, maybe the Serbs from Hungary but certainly not the ones from Serbia. Anyway I don't go around claiming that battles of Kressenbrun or Muhi were fought by Hungarian and Serbian forces against Czechs and Mongols. As you said maybe there were individual Hungarians there ( the most logical thing would be that they were mercenaries ) but again I don't know any contemporary sources about that. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind Hungarian participation but I would just like to see source cause it would be significant scientific discovery. Also if you have Magyarország hadtörténete by your hand you can check in it's references where the info about Hungarians at battle of Kosovo was taken from. --Clanedstino (talk) 20:29, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Probable also this possibility, but i was find for the time being such source, which so mention, that Hungary send this knights. The Serbs in battle of Muhi also neither vassals, but by way of helpers fight. At the same time Serbs and Croats was be stationed at Buda and this soldiers for a while cover to the city againts the Mongols. Doncseczznánje 20:59, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh man, your english is... I don't get the first sentence at all. I see you study croatian, write in it what you wanted to say. --Clanedstino (talk) 23:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Albanians and Bosnians
There are two sources for Albanians and Bosnians being in the battle. This article should be corrected to say it. (Unfortunately, the second source needs registration).

The presence of albanians and bosnians is sourced. At first sight, I don't see anything on the article saying that only Serbians were present in Lazar's army. Don't remove the sourced information again, and discuss here why you think that these sources are not valid. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

This other book explicitely says that Serbian textbooks omitted the Serbian presence in purpose, to make it look like a Serbian-only battle: --Enric Naval (talk) 18:44, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Hardly a relevant and reliable sources ( the second one is just a newspaper article ) none of the authors are medievalists nor original researchers, Malcolm is further more journalist and politically engaged Albanian lobbyist, his  works  didn't get positive reviews by the experts, for example see Thomas Emmert's [review | http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.php?id=3058] on Kosovo: short history. Emmert is on the other hand one of the few western experts on medieval Balkan. You can check his article on Battle of Kosovo here:. Now call me crazy but I think that there isn't a single reference about Albanians here. Also as it's widely known everything about Kosovo is highly susceptible to political interpretations since 1999. and this political interpretation have tainted so called scientific literature ever since, Malcolm's work is probably the best example. Every one will have big problem to find pre 1999. source about Albanians in the battle of Kosovo. Generally we can't take every peace of written word as a source , sources have their weight depending on author's credentials and academic record, in the English speaking area there are few of these experts concerning medieval Balkan and southeastern Europe, most notable of them are John VA Fine and Thomas Emmert, both of them speak only about Serbian and Bosnian coalition in the battle of Kosovo, if there were anyone else there and there were sources about that I doubt they would fail to mention them.

About:

This other book explicitely says that Serbian textbooks omitted the Serbian presence in purpose

I can just ask, are Fine and Emmert Serbian textbook writers? Or did they learn from Serbian textbooks?

Now let's talk little about Malcolm. Malcolm is not an expert on medieval history of southeastern Europe( he majored history of mathematics for God's sake ), he doesn't know Serbian language ( probably Greek and Turkish as well ) nor he used Serbian literature while writing his book, for example that would be like writing history of USA without reading books in English, also he wrote his book with  assistance  of several Albanian scholars. Further more he is president of Anglo-Albanian society and decade long propagator of Albanian interests in press, hence he doesn't fulfill basic rule for a historian: neutrality.

Now, I can start listing sources that mention just Serbs and Bosnians in the battle to prove I'm right. For example we can check Konstantin Joseph Jirecek, Austrian-Czech historian, one of the finest experts on history of medieval Serbia and one of the founders of albanology. Along with other respected albanologists like Sufflay and Thaloczy he wrote a capital work Illyrisch-Albanische forschungen ( Illyrian-Albanian studies ) where they covered most important moments in Albanian history, surprisingly they don't mention participation of Albanians in battle of Kosovo, they just say it was battle of Serbs and Bosnians against the Turks. Or what to say about crucial collection of sources on Albanian history collected by Jirecek, Sufflay and Thaloczy Acta Albaniae. In this collection every single peace of contemporary source even remotely connected with the Albanians is published, and again surprisingly there is no mention on Albanians and battle of Kosovo, to remind those are contemporary primary sources, written in the time of the actual event i.e battle of Kosovo:. To conclude those fine experts who spent their lives in archives and libraries couldn't find any contemporary source about Albanians in battle of Kosovo, really funny. And what about Jirecek, in his history of the Serbs he explicitly says that Lazar's army consisted of Serbian and Bosnian troops while Ottoman army had with them vassal Albanians from Epirus and Thessaly?

--Clanedstino (talk) 20:35, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I looked at the text of Illyrisch-Albanische forschungen ( Illyrian-Albanian studies ) and I can't fid where the battle is mentioned. Your link pointed to pages 352-353 but those pages talk about 1856-1858.


 * In your second link, there is no chapter for 15th June 1389. I looked at page 106 and it jumps from "27 februarii" to "20 iulii". Please point the exact chapter where the battle of kosovo is mentioned so I can attempt to translate it.


 * Anyways, check The Kosovo crisis. In page 17, Serbs claim that there were only Serbs at the time, while Albanians claim that they were there already, and one scholar even says that Kosovo's Albanians could be Serbs who were forced to change culture. It was written by Crhistopher Williams, a reader in Russian studies "widely published on social and political trends in Russia, the Baltic States, East-Central Europe and the Balkans. (...) member of the Russian Academy of political science".


 * And Sabrina P. Ramet Sabrina, Professor of International Studies, graduated in Political Science, published two books in Cambridge University Press saying that Albanians already lived in Kosovo in in page 359, and repeats it in  (several pages, search for "1389") and cites Noel Malcom and also Miranda Vickers (I can't find her credentials, but she got a Balkans book published by Columbia University Press).


 * And Dan Brown, in a Routledge book page 166 describes the Albanian claims that Serbs asked them to help in the battle.


 * In a 2001 report to the Council of Europe, the Bulgarian Socialist group said "It is well established that there were both Albanians and Serbians fighting in both armies." page 117


 * Croat sociologist Jasminka Udovički published in Duke University Press page 29 "Albanian historians argue that some Albanians fought with the Serbs against the Turks in the battle of Kosovo of 1389". It also says that they probably descended from Illyrians, lived in Kosovo's mountains about the time of the battle, and were drafted into Dursan's army.


 * Professor of history John K. Cox "But there were also certainly Bosnians and Albanians, who were Christian at the time, among the Christian fighters." (page 29) "It is also significant that in this battle the Albanians were on the same side as the Serbs. Albania had not yet been fully conquered by the Turks, and thus the Albanians had not yet converted to Islam in significant numbers" (page 31)


 * Samuel Totten, genocide scholar(?) page 56, "Popular Serb accounts tend not to note that Kosovo Albanians fought alongside Lazar or that some Serb mercenaries supported the Ottoman forces."


 * For works before 1999, see 1894's Studies on Kosova, by Albanian Arshi Pipa, page 241 "And it was in Kosovo Polje (Blackbird field) that the memorable battle between Turks and Slavs (including Albanians, according to Albanian historians) took place in 1389. (...)".


 * In 1983, Croat journalist Branka Magaš, footnote seven in page 41 "The ethnic composition of the area in the fourteenth century, and whether and how this changed in the centuries that followed, is subject to dispute: a dispute which often pits Serbian against Albanian historians. (...) A division of historical schools along ethnic lines is, of course, not solely a Balkna phenomenon. But debate in this subject has acquired a new lease of life in Yugoslavia since the recents events in Kosovo, and what seemed simply a factual disagreement has now become a terrain for nationalist propaganda in both sides."


 * Cris E. Toffolo, Associate Professor of Political Science, published in State University of New York Press page 68 "In fact, in 1839, members of the two populations fought together as allies on both sides of the infamous battle of Kosovo."


 * Noel Malcolm is an historian and writes books about the Balkans, we should discard his work only because he majored in history of mathematics? Oh, wait, you mean that we should discard him because he was influenced by Albanians.


 * This article should include the Albanian POV that there were Albanians in Kosovo and that some of them were in Lazar's army. There are sources saying that it was already disputed pre-1999, and the sources are good enough to include that there is a dispute.


 * (Also, mentioning that in the Turks side there were both Serbians and Albanians drafted from territories conquered by Turks) --Enric Naval (talk) 23:20, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

If you check the history of the article you will found out that I put the mention that there were also Serb and Albanian vassals in the Ottoman army, so don't lecture me about it.

Second, you seem to have vague idea about what a source is in historical article, you list a opinion of journalist, Bulgarian socialist group( ! ), genocide scholar (!), sociologist, political and international studies researchers, poet(!) etc, however I see few historians there, certainly not the one of the Fine's or Emmert's caliber. As I said not every peace of written word is source, sources have to be relevant for the certain matter, written by the relevant and respected authors, in this case it means written by the historians who had formal and respected knowledge about history of the region in the middle ages. For example a book written by certain Albanian in the middle of the crisis in former Yugoslavia, who was this guy, which university he attended, where he got education to write about the history?or he is just an Albanian poet (!) writing from the Albanian nationalistic POV. Is he any expert at all or he is one of the billion of the people who published something without any value at all? Using opinions of journalists, sociologists, Bulgarian socialists etc makes this article a political, not a historical thing. So let's stick to the history.

I looked at the text of Illyrisch-Albanische forschungen ( Illyrian-Albanian studies )[5] and I can't fid where the battle is mentioned. Your link pointed to pages 352-353 but those pages talk about 1856-1858.

Sorry, page 78:

[In your second link[6], there is no chapter for 15th June 1389. I looked at page 106 and it jumps from "27 februarii" to "20 iulii". Please point the exact chapter where the battle of kosovo is mentioned so I can attempt to translate it.]

Lol, that's the point a sourcebook on Albanian history collected by the most prominent scholars doesn't have a single reference on Battle of Kosovo i.e there is not a single peace of contemporary news that speaks on Albanian participation in the battle. I think it beats all journalists and poets you listed. We are speaking of contemporary sources, written in the time of the battle, and there isn't any of them mentioning Albanians on Serbian side. That is something obvious for experts like Fine and Emmert, but of course not very clear to bunch of Bulgarian socialists.


 * Noel Malcolm is an historian and writes books about the Balkans, we should discard his work only because he majored in history of mathematics? Oh, wait, you mean that we should discard him because he was influenced by Albanians.

Only? Sory, but would you like a dentist to perform a brain surgery on you? After all, they are both MD's.

Obviously you have a hard time to comprehend that if someone is to be regarded as reliable on certain aspect he has to have formal education about it and respectful academic record, Malcolm was absolutely silent about history of Kosovo and Metohija 'till 1999. and then suddenly he became an expert about it, and not only about modern era but also on antique and medieval history. Now, everyone knows that it takes to be a superhuman to be an expert on entire history, most of us whole life specialize in one small area, like certain person or time frame of certain nation. However, superhuman Malcolm managed to specialize 3000 years of history of certain geographic area in a year and immediately wrote a whole book without any preparation works, usually historians start with smaller articles, reviews, discussions etc before they can write a book, however our genius Malcolm doesn't need that, he goes straight for the book. And what about his formal education, history of maths is nice, but did they teach him Old Slavic there, or slavic cyrilic paleography and diplomatics, medieval history of Serbia, Greece, Bulgaria and Ottoman empire, how exactly can he write about history of medieval Serbia without those things? It's like me writing history of medieval Ireland without knowing Latin, Irish and absolutely nothing on Irish medieval sources, and without any formal knowledge on history of Ireland what so ever. Would you treat me as reliable source then? Also one very important not on Malcolm and all the others quoting him ( like Cox ), he is a openly biased author, he is a chairman of Anglo-Albanian society and long time advocate of kosovo's independence, historian has to be neutral, he has to detach himself from any political or national affiliation, Malcolm is totally opposite, his entire book is conceived as an argument for Kosovo's independence and thus can hardly be taken as reliable source. --Clanedstino (talk) 11:09, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Online sources for Albanians alliance with Serbs in the Battle of Kosovo 1389, a fact well known and accepted from historians:


 * 1) 1
 * 2) 2
 * 3) 3
 * 4) 4
 * 5) 5
 * 6) 6
 * 7) 7
 * 8) 8
 * 9) 9
 * 10) 10
 * 11) 11
 * 12) 12
 * 13) 13
 * 14) 14
 * 15) 15
 * 16) 16

There are more results online you can check yourself. Aigest (talk) 13:36, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Again which one of this sources is actual historic work written by historian, expert on medieval southeastern Europe? All I see are bunch of  political analysis  written in last 10 years by the people who have no deep knowledge about this matter and have clear political agenda, for example:

1. Danilo Zolo, italian jurist and filospher of law ( ! ), certainly interesting person, but what he knows about battle of Kosovo? We don't know, and we can't know cause he didn't even put reference in his 6 line remark on battle of Kosovo. No references, no value of his 6 lines.

2. Janusz Bugajski, Polish politicologist and political activist, researches modern political parties in eastern Europe, further more: '' director of the New European Democracies Project and senior fellow in the Europe Program at CSIS. He has served as a consultant for various U.S. organizations and government agencies and testifies regularly before the U.S. Congress '' that much about his neutrality, again why should he be considered as a source for anything about history, especially about historical details of Battle of Kosovo? Does he has any published work on similar issues, any formal knowledge? Did he bothered to put reference in his 3 line mention of battle of Kosovo? Again, no references, no value.

3. John Cox, another overnight expert on history, but admittedly historian of some kind, his work is one of the kind of short histories where someone squeezes 1500 years of history into 200 pages. I think it's obvious that he's no expert on medieval period of Serbian history, but even if we turn blind eye on this still he fails to reference the part about battle of Kosovo so as far as any serious historian can say there is no corroboration to his words.

4. footnote?

5. Sabrina P. Ramet, Central and Southeast European Politics Since 1989 ? Nor the paper is about medieval history, nor she is medievalist, again 3 line mention of the battle, without references. One has to ask himself: are all this people simply copy some common place without even looking into the matter? Written in 2010, probably just taking data from Malcolm or someone similar.

6. Vickers. I don't get it, is this some fashion in anglo-american historiography of not giving references or literature they used, don't they know that paper without reference is worthless? Girl is speaking of Hungarians and Bulgarians in the battle of Kosovo, something that even Hungarian or Bulgarian historiography is not aware about, if we don't account squad of Croat knights as Hungarians ( in fact their leader Ivanis Palizna was rebel of Hungarian king and fought against him in Dalmatia ). I think that there were Albanians in the coalition just as Bulgarians were.

will be continued. --Clanedstino (talk) 16:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll say.


 * 1) You can't look at original documents and make your own conclusions, that's WP:OR original research.


 * 2) Those sources don't talk about the composition of the troops of the armies. They say that Turks fought with Serbs and Bosnian. Hint: we know that Lazar had Hungarian knights but those sources don't mention them, does this mean that we should remove everything about hungarian knights? Idem for Albanian Muslim fighting in Turk's army, they are not mentioned there but I doubt very much that there was not a single Albanian Muslim there. There are sources that look at specific details of the events, and give little details that more general sources don't give. Jirecek's source dedicates only half a sentence to the actual battle and its participants "The Great Battle of Kosovo-Field (Kosovo Polje) in Pristina against the Serbs and Bosniei-(1389)". He has no space for explaining what ethnic people got involved in the battle, and he probably never intended to cover it in the first place. When you want to get very specific details, you have to go to more specific sources, and those are usually more obscure. I say that there are good-quality sources from university presses saying that there were Albanians under Lazar's banner (and, actually, Serbs and Albanians in both sides!). Some of them give specific explanations of why they were there.


 * 3) You are artificially restraining the set of sources to limits that are too narrow: they can't be Albanian, they can't have worked with Albanian scholars, it can't be any historian they have to be graduated in mediavalist history, he is not "an expert on medieval period of Serbian history", sources later than 1999 are tainted, this book doesn't cite sources in the way I like, he has to agree with "serious" historians, etc. --Enric Naval (talk) 16:56, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 16 sources are more than enough for the composition of the armies and if anyone considers them unreliable he should address his issues to RSN.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 23:37, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oliver Schmitt stating that Albanian Muzaka troops participated in the battle. Apparently there were some 4000 of Theodor Muzaka troops killed in that battle. Do we need more? Aigest (talk) 08:20, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Short deployment description here. Aigest (talk) 10:23, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

It is a well established fact that in the Battle of Kosovo participated three contingents of troops under the command of Prince Lazar: 1) his own troops, 2) those of Vuk Branković, and 3) those of Vlatko Vuković. So it was a battle between Serbs on one side and Ottomans on the other. Some add also Bosnians, as Vlatko Vuković of Zachlumia was a nobleman of Tvrtko I, King of the Serbs and of Bosnia. Who knows, maybe there were individual foot-soldiers from Manchuria, Nubia, or Albania, but it is ridiculous to enumerate tribal or ethnic origins of all the individuals that participated in the battle. Vladimir  (talk) 17:44, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Apparently you didn't read the sources above. The "well established fact" is that in fact there was a balkan coalition and Albanians were among them, just look at the multitude of sources. Could you comment on the sources above please, I've my opinion too on the battle but that's not an argument. By Schmitt and Madrugearu we have Albanian trops of Theodore Muzaka participating and even loosing 4000 men in that battle (Theodore Muzaka was killed in that battle too). Do you find this number insignificant? Also there are the chronicles of the Ottoman historian Idris Bitlisi (see here) which mention other Albanians under Balsha which participated in the Battle (even Madrugearu agrees on that). He speaks of 50,000 a number which is exaggerated IMO, but it shows clearly the significance of Albanian number in the coalition Aigest (talk) 08:57, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

That's not my opinion, those three contingents of troops are enumerated in the cited book by V.A. Fine. Your sources just repeat these three basic sources (if a legend could be termed a source). I looked up the first in that column of links above, and it says that the Battle of Kosovo was fought on the plain of Vardar... very amusing :) Vladimir  (talk) 17:20, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * According to Ottoman historians, a small number of Turks gloriously defeated 500,000 Christians of most nations from southeastern and central Europe: Serbs, Bosnians, Czechs, Poles, Venetians, Albanians, Wallachians, Hungarians. Very reliable, indeed ;)
 * Participation of Teodor Muzaka in the battle is suggested by a 16th-century history of the Muzaka family.
 * Participation of the Serbian lord Đurađ II Balšić is a legend (see the article on him).
 * Sorry I did'n get your joke. Your opinion is WP:OR thus irrelevant. Schmitt, Ducellier, Madrugearu (and for this issue most of 16 links above) fulfill WP:RS and their claims should be included in the article. If you think they are not there is always WP:RSN where you can address your concerns. Aigest (talk) 21:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Date
Date of the battle is not disputed. It is known that it took place on St. Vitus Day, June 15 1389. The battle took place nearly two hundred years before invention of Gregorian calendar, as such it cannot have different old style and new style dates. Footnote No. 6 of the main article clearly says so. Serbs celebrate its anniversary on June 28 N.S. today, but that is only because Serbian Orthodox Church still uses Julian calendar. In a sense Serbs have pushed the anniversary forward than it should be.

If I have to correct the date one more time I'm putting this notice in the main article. 193.203.26.47 (talk) 17:13, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Decisive Ottoman Victory
This article says: Result Inconclusive Are you joking? :) Yes, at the end of the battle Murad I was killed but the Turks already won the battle then. Please read this article The Battle of Ankara, the Serbs fought against Timur (the enemy of The Ottomans)... Why? Because The Turks defeated the Serbs in 1389, and Serbia became a vassal state of The Ottomans. The Serbs were under The Ottoman rule. Böri (talk) 11:53, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I answered at the battle of Marica talk since I didn't edit this article.

--Clanedstino (talk) 19:31, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Fine says that both sides were wiped, so it was inconclusive. Serbia became a vassal state later because Turkish brought more soldiers from the East, while Serbs had spent all their army. --Enric Naval (talk) 19:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Another reference states the Turkish victory... http://books.google.com/books?id=tYIxK0Mo1wwC&pg=PA23&dq=battle+of+kosovo&hl=en&ei=FGITTtfqFIKV8QOmkISbDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CD8Q6AEwBThu#v=onepage&q=battle%20of%20kosovo&f=false

Are you guys serious with this? Kosovo was one of the great decisive battles in history! It's of huge national importance to the Serbs because they lost, and with it, their nationhood. I really can't believe this point has to be defended. The Ottoman army was not wiped out. That's ridiculous. Wikipedia is becoming totally useless for historical information. What's next? Mohacs was a draw? Why not Lepanto, too? The Ottomans didn't "wipe out" Serbia because they had no intention of doing so. The whole point of the battle was to prevent a Christian league from forming against the Ottomans. They accomplished this, made Serbia a vassal, and left. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpiccone (talk • contribs) 07:30, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Turkish victory
When two armies engage in a battlefield, and one army is totally annihilated and the other stands its ground no matter how much casualty it suufers, the one who stood its ground is victorious. No need to argue that. One can search for "biased" sources and actually find them, but this won't change the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.131.129.81 (talk) 13:55, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello? Both armies were annihilated. It was the Serbs who stood their ground (Turks couldn't conquer Kosovo). Please provide a source saying that Turks won the battle, or stop removing the information. --Enric Naval (talk) 16:37, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Prof. John Van Antwerp Fine, who doesn't seem to be writing jokes, states the following (pp. 410-11): [The battle of Kosovo] resulted in the bulk of both armies being wiped out... Thus since the Turks also withdrew, one can conclude the battle was a draw... Thus, though the Serbs did not lose the battle, in the long run, over the next two or three years, they lost the war because they were no longer able to resist the Turks effectively... I suppose the result could be stated as: "Inconclusive, long-term strategic victory for the Ottomans".
 * IP 217.131.129.81 has repeatedly removed cited text from the article, and should be warned not to do that. Though judging from the IP's talk page, simple warnings may not work with that POV pusher. Vladimir  (talk) 17:04, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with 217.131.129.81, it is not a shame that you lose of the Ottoman army so don't be so nationalist! --Vinie007 18:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * What a silly comment (to say the least). I only cited John V A Fine. Or are you implying that Prof. Fine is a Serb nationalist? Also, this is not a forum, with whom you agree or disagree means .... nothing. Vladimir  (talk) 18:44, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Another source clearly stating that the battle was an Ottoman victory. http://books.google.com/books?id=Cmm4J2Ug4o8C&pg=PA1994&dq=battle+of+kosovo&hl=en&ei=iV8TTuOoB4Kl8QP4nZyzDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CD8Q6AEwBTgU#v=onepage&q=battle%20of%20kosovo&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.131.129.81 (talk) 19:04, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Another one: http://books.google.com/books?id=tYIxK0Mo1wwC&pg=PA23&dq=battle+of+kosovo&hl=en&ei=FGITTtfqFIKV8QOmkISbDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CD8Q6AEwBThu#v=onepage&q=battle%20of%20kosovo&f=false

78.191.170.42 (talk) 14:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC) Since you kindly asked to be provided with a source claiming that Turks won the war, I found a nice and tidy source to enlighten you. It's from Dictionary of Wars,by George Childs Kohn, p. 95. "A Christian army of Serbs, Bulgars, Bosnians, Albanians, and others was decisively defeated by the Ottomans at the Battle of Kosovo in 1389." There you go, it is a pretty-well-known and unbiased book, feel free to use it. (http://ebookee.org/Dictionary-of-Wars_374476.html)

Who is Etienne the person doesn't exist the son of Lazar is Stefan Lazaravic and his daughter is called Olivera
I got an notice that my changes on this page were not constructive?! Firstly, who are persons Etienne and Marie Despina. Did the you mean Stefan and Olivera? Secondly, Gjergj II Balsha is Đurađ II Stracimirović or Đurađ II. He was Serbian nobleman that controlled land called Zeta. He was not Albanian. There is no prof that he send any troupes to Kosovo no matter he was a Serbian nobleman. Thirdly who are Dhimiter Jonima and Teodor II Muzaka (who died in the battle together with 4000 of his men) is putting that constructive? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.2.203.3 (talk) 21:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The problem is that you are adding data without any reference to support it. Then, after many edits like this you started to manipulate some data, and all this without any explanation or edit summary. Please explain your data with references and try to use edit summaries to explain what are you doing, and why. For further help about Wikipeia don`t hesitate to contact me or ask for help from anybody. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Did person who added this data which I am referring add any references? If you are not interested in objective article than I see what is you stand about this disinformation. I have no need to argue and I will not change the article any more I only hope that my comment will be read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.2.203.3 (talk) 21:49, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Please try to respect the NPOV. If the article already has some data without a reference, if you are adding data to it, you should add references too. I am not arguing, I am just asking for some references since you added a lot of data, and I hoped that later you will add some reference, but you did`t. Please read WP:SOURCE and WP:AGF. You are more than welcome to contribute to any article but please try to use edit summaries and references. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 22:25, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Numerious Sources
Numerious sources has been added to the artictle stating that the battle was a Ottoman victory. I'm tired to change it to this well-known fact. There was no such a thing as "draw" in a battle. http://books.google.com.tr/books?id=L_xxOM85bD8C&pg=PA478&lpg=PA478&dq=battle+of+kosovo&source=bl&ots=XpnARyvVrf&sig=dUNEBfP9EYpoaTWQzj1Pjr8UGgc&hl=tr&sa=X&ei=Yn8NUJmoLMWE4gSAqZ3nCg&ved=0CFEQ6AEwBjgK#v=onepage&q=battle%20of%20kosovo&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noyan Sipahi (talk • contribs) 16:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

This book's title is "Ground Warfare: An International Encyclopedia" and one can clearly see that the book is in English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noyan Sipahi (talk • contribs) 07:55, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We already have source for this expanded intro. As you can see, Ottoman victory is already in the infobox, so nothing is lost, but only expanded... -- WhiteWriterspeaks 21:51, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Lead
This part should be removed from the lead and elaborated in the body of the article, as it's controversial and minor. Especially the second sentence. ''According to some sources, contingents of Wallachians, Hungarians, Croatians, Poles, Albanians, Franks, Czechs, and Bulgarians were also part of this army. Claims about such a coalition, however, first appeared about eighty years after the battle in a book written by an Ottoman author, Oruç of Edirne, and were repeated by later Turkish historians.'' --Kebeta (talk) 17:03, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * To be clear, these claims are controversial, but the existence of these claims is a fact, which is stated in the first sentence. Also, there's nothing controversial in the second sentence - that's a historical fact. It's another question whether the claims deserve to be mentioned in the lead or not. Maybe not.


 * Regarding your changes to the lead, "Christian" is a very broad term, and might not be very relevant in this case, like some other broad terms ("European", "Balkan", etc.). Thomas A. Emmert states the following: On 28 June 1389 the combined Serbian forces from the territories governed by Prince Lazar and Vuk Brankovic together with auxiliary troops sent by King Tvrtko of Bosnia faced Sultan Murad and his army on the field of Kosovo.


 * John Van Antwerp Fine: Thus the Serbian army was composed of three contingents under these three leaders [Lazar, Branković, and Vuković], none of whom was then a Turkish vassal... The Turks advanced into Serbia in June 1389 and the Serb forces marched to meet them. The two armies camped at Kosovo Polje. Lazar commanded the Serbs and Sultan Murad I commanded in person the Ottoman troops... Thus, though the Serbs did not lose the battle, in the long run, over the next two or three years, they lost the war.


 * We know that Tvrtko I was the King of the Serbs, Bosnia and the Seaside and the Western Lands. The title can be shortened as "King of the Serbs and of Bosnia" (but you removed "the Serbs" from it). See also Fine (p.413): It should also be noted that Vuk was the last Serb prince (excluding the Serb nobles under Tvrtko) to accept Ottoman suzerainity. To be precise, Vlatko Vuković was from Zachlumia, which was ruled by Tvrtko, but was a territorial entity separate from Bosnia. Vladimir  (talk) 18:14, 25 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Nobody dispute that the Serbs were a major party on the christian side, and that this battle is particularly important to Serbian history. However, you can't put Vlatko Vuković's participation under Serbian name (regerding Fine - Bosnia wasn't Turkish vassal either). The fact is that Battle of Maritsa was a main Serbian/Turkish battle (aldo less known).
 * These others: "Wallachians, Hungarians, Croatians, Poles, Albanians, Franks, Czechs, and Bulgarians" should be removed from the lead, because such a detail description of the army is not suitable for the lead. Maybe "christian mercenaries/contingents" or something like that, to make it shorter and clearer. The other sentence "Claims about such a coalition, however, first appeared about eighty years after the battle in a book written by an Ottoman author, Oruç of Edirne, and were repeated by later Turkish historians." should be removed not only from the lead, but from entire article, as nonsense. (Do you have a report from the battle before Oruç of Edirne to confirm that others didn't participated, and that only army was a Serbian one?)
 * As for Tvrtko I of Bosnia, he was a Bosnian king. Later he added King of Rascia and then King of Dalmatia and Croatia...Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor was by the grace of God elected Holy Roman Emperor, forever August, King in Germany, of Hungary, Bohemia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, Rama, Serbia, Galicia, Lodomeria, Cumania and Bulgaria, etc. Prince-Infante in Spain, Archduke of Austria, Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, Margrave of Moravia, Duke of Luxemburg, the Upper and Lower Silesia, Württemberg and Teck, Prince of Swabia, Princely Count of Habsburg, Tyrol, Ferrette, Kyburg, Gorizia, Landgrave of Alsace, Margrave of the Holy Roman Empire, Enns, Burgau, the Upper and Lower Lusatia, Lord of the Wendish March, Pordenone and Salins, etc. etc. So by your logic when Ferdinand went to battle, that was a Serbian army? And BTW, Vlatko Vuković was as much Croatian as Serbian (read Bosnian). Stjepan Vukčić Kosača who was born after Vlatko died, was the first of Kosača's who distinguish himself as Herzog of Saint Sava (because of internal Bosnian dispute). Kebeta (talk) 20:40, 25 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Following the nomenclature used in the cited sources (Fine, Emmert), the army can be called Serbian. However, I'll reword the sentence to include Tvrtko and his Bosnian contingent along with Lazar right from the start.
 * As I said, the mention of these troops can be removed from the lead. They are mentioned and explained in the main text. They should remain enumerated as they are, and not replaced by some vague phrase, like "christian mercenaries/contingents". Oruç's book appeared in c. 1467, and there are reports about the battle that appeared before it, including a text by an Ottoman author, Ahmedi. None of these earlier reports mentioned or implied a "Christian coalition" of all those nations. So, Oruç of Edirne is the first author who suggested such a coalition, and that sentence states it quite clearly. Your comment on it is a nonsense.
 * You wrote that Tvrtko was first a Bosnian king, and later added King of Rascia and then King of Dalmatia and Croatia. First he was ban of Bosnia. On the day when he was crowned king, he took the title Kralj Srbljem, Bosni, Pomorju, Humskoj zemlji, Donjim Krajem, Zapadnim Stranam, Usori i Podrinju. No mention of Dalmatia and Croatia (though this is maybe how you interpret it). In his title he first refers to Serbs, then to Bosnia. So, if we want to shorten his long title, it's quite legitimate to say "King of the Serbs and (of) Bosnia". He regarded himself as the continuation of the House of Nemanjić. Your comparison with Ferdinand I is ridiculous in this case, as is ridiculous your interpretation of "my logic". And to repeat once more the fact that Vlatko Vuković was from Zachlumia, which was ruled by Tvrtko, but was a territorial entity separate from Bosnia. By this I did not assert that he was either bosnian or croatian or serbian. Stick to the facts, your interpretations are of no interest. Vladimir  (talk) 16:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Regarding Tvrtko's title, you were probably referring to the one he accepted after the Battle of Kosovo. But in 1389 his title was still King of the Serbs, of Bosnia, etc... OK, I've removed those two sentences from the lead. Vladimir  (talk) 21:17, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I am pleased that you have improved the article by your latest edits, However I do not agree with anything that you have said while explaining your edits, but this is not a place for that (I think). I can't resist not to write one thing do, above you have stated "It should also be noted that Vuk was the last Serb prince (excluding the Serb nobles under Tvrtko) to accept Ottoman suzerainity. To be precise, Vlatko Vuković was from Zachlumia, which was ruled by Tvrtko, but was a territorial entity separate from Bosnia.", and after that you have stated "And to repeat once more the fact that Vlatko Vuković was from Zachlumia, which was ruled by Tvrtko, but was a territorial entity separate from Bosnia. By this I did not assert that he was either bosnian or croatian or serbian." What are the facts here, and what are my interpretations? BTW, if you think that it's quite legitimate to say that Tvrtko was "King of the Serbs and (of) Bosnia", you should try to rename the title of that article...:-) BTW, Kebeta (talk) 17:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The point is that I did not intend to get into a discussion here, on Vuković's "ethnicity" or "nationality". The sentences that you cite were not ordered in that sequence with the intention to suggest what you concluded from them (i.e. how you interpreted their meaning). Yes, it's quite legitimate to say that Tvrtko was "King of the Serbs and of Bosnia" (see his full title in that time), but I don't say that it is obligatory to use that form. And really, I don't care about that article's title :) Vladimir  (talk) 17:55, 2 March 2011 (UTC)