Talk:Mamusha

Flag query
Hi all, WhiteWriter removed the flagicon from the infobox, citing WP:MOSFLAG in his edit summary. However, what WP:MOSFLAG actually says is:

So, I restored the flagicon. Any suggestions? bobrayner (talk) 01:57, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Mamuša is not in Republic of Kosovo, but on territory of Kosovo. Per neutrality question, we do NOT use RoK flag on kosovo location articles, nowhere, except on directly related subjects. This municipality is not that... Adding flag is nothing else but blind nationalism pushing. --08:30, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Whitewriter says that: "Mamuša is not in Republic of Kosovo"
 * The municipality of Mamuša says that it's in the Republic of Kosovo.
 * You're just discrediting yourself further. bobrayner (talk) 14:50, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * And not it isn't, as RoK does not exist in this source. Wow, almighty power of blind sourcing. Now get real and start talking. For each sours we have counter-source here, so POV sourcing is bad practice. . We do not use flags as Kosovo Independence is disputed. One POV is that Mamuša is in the Republic of Kosovo, other POV is that Mamuša is in the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija. Neutrality is in the middle, therefor we use only Kosovo, as geo location, WITHOUT any other insinuation. Write to me here, do you agree that RoK independence (and Mamuša flag, therefor) is disputed? -- WhiteWriterspeaks 15:23, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * If you continue to insist that the Republic of Kosovo "does not exist", I don't think your input is either necessary or helpful, and articles will be improved without you. It was you who pushed to split an RoK article out from the Kosovo article, so that the human geography would be completely separate from the physical geography; it's incomprehensible that you now want human-geographical stuff to link back to the Kosovo article. So be it; merge RoK back into the Kosovo article, as there was never a consensus to split it anyway, and then there's no argument over which argument should be thetarget of thousands of links. We don't have to make a thousand different articles into a battleground for one particular issue that you feel strongly about. bobrayner (talk) 17:15, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I never said that RoK does not exist, that is nonsense. But we HAVE sources that can prove that RoK does not exist. But we should not obey those sources in current situation. So both your sources and those are useless here. 20+ users was included in that split btw, which is unrelated to this question. Now lets go back to my question, and this article. Respond to me, in order to solve this question. Do you agree that RoK independence is disputed, or you think that RoK status should be the same as any other state? -- WhiteWriterspeaks 18:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

There is a simple solution for this dilemma: We go with what sources say, and what Whitewriter says can safely be ignored (on talkpages), or reverted (in articles). Easy. Why must thousands of articles be turned into a battleground for WP:FRINGE nationalist beliefs? bobrayner (talk) 23:53, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Whitewriter says: "I never said that RoK does not exist, that is nonsense. But we HAVE sources that can prove that RoK does not exist."
 * Whitewriter said earlier: "RoK does not exist. Wow, almighty power of blind sourcing."
 * The source says that Mamuša is in the Republic of Kosovo.
 * Do you agree that RoK independence is disputed, or you think that RoK status should be the same as any other state? Trolling and misrepresentation will not help this time. I will write once again, and again, until you respond. Do you agree that RoK independence is disputed, or you think that RoK status should be the same as any other state? -- WhiteWriterspeaks 00:26, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * And one more. Do you think that this source is neutral and reliable source for Wikipedia? -- WhiteWriterspeaks 00:38, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't be silly. The town's website is a perfectly reliable source for describing where the town is. If you genuinely believe otherwise, I can take this to the reliable sources noticeboard. bobrayner (talk) 22:24, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That is not the question. Your POV pushing have to stop. Flag is removed per all other articles and kosovo-note existence. That website is NOT reliable source of information, same as this one is not. Get over it. -- WhiteWriterspeaks 15:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * We have the kosovo-note; surely that enlightens (or calms) anybody who is confused (or angry) about the name of the country? It's quite normal to have a national flag in an infobox. I'm no great fan of flagicons but they seem to be default - hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of settlement articles have them in the infobox - so I'm happy to go along with the consensus on that point. I don't see why something so trivial has to become a nationalist crisis. If you want MOSFLAG to change, try asking for it to be changed. If you think a town's website is not a reliable source for which country the town is in, try the reliable sources noticeboard. If you have proof that "RoK does not exist", that would mean drastic change to many articles, and you ought to present evidence on a noticeboard somewhere. Or just make up a fifth or sixth excuse to remove a symbol of a country you dislike... bobrayner (talk) 02:36, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Millions of settlements in France, Germany may have flags. But those are normal, undisputed countries, recognised by everyone, member of UN. Kosovo is not that. Kosovo is not member of UN. Does not have control over entire territory. Kosovo is disputed entity. Therefor, cannot have flag on this articles, as we agreed on talk:Kosovo. Raise the question on talk:Kosovo. If you gain consensus, we will add flags on all articles. Now, 0 articles have Kosovo flag, per agreement. Your Pov pushing on one minor article is pointless. Follow consensus we have based on Kosovo split, or gain a new one. That,s how wiki works. Yoir current way is just WP:DE. Now the fact. Kosovo ≠ Republic of Kosovo and Kosovo ≠ Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija. -- WhiteWriterspeaks 10:37, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 6 June 2022

 * 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: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 11:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Mamuša → Mamusha – Mamusha 128 Mamuša 56. Mamusha is the common name of the town and municipality. Ahmet Q. (talk) 10:35, 6 June 2022 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support Support, the arguments given by the move requester support a renaming of the article. Truthseeker2006 (talk) 16:43, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.Alltan (talk) 20:55, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong Support as per nomination. Iaof2017 (talk) 10:04, 12 June 2022 (UTC)