Talk:Niš/Archive 1

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Niš. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100210062019/http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=50174 to http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=50174
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120220133129/http://www.ni.rs/index-e.html to http://www.ni.rs/index-e.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725135730/http://www.danas.rs/20040417/vikend3.html to http://www.danas.rs/20040417/vikend3.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121027123134/http://www.arhivnis.co.rs/cirilica/idelatnost/br%201/cpksaobsrbije.htm to http://www.arhivnis.co.rs/cirilica/idelatnost/br%201/cpksaobsrbije.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Real population data
The source of data for City of Nis - Statistical office of the Republic of Serbia The real data for City of Nis populations are: City of Nis 	250,518 Nis settlement	235,159 -- Gaston28

Population
Population according to the InfoPlease website]: 174,000. This was Wikipedia's former figure. Arguing would be fruitless. Wetman 20:06, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The data on this site for the City of Nis are outdated. Also, I noticed that according to that document Novi Sad, has 191,300, but according to this document  Novi Sad, has 190,602. -- Gaston28


 * (William M. Connolley 20:13, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)) Also http://www.library.uu.nl/wesp/populstat/Europe/yugoslft.htm 173,400 in 2002.

I have added population estimates, taken from city of Nis's official website: http://www.nis.org.yu/index-e.html; that is where you can check it out.Info from World Gazetter are quite unrelieable and old, and I think that the city can speak for itself through the website. NeroN_BG

Please do not use some untrustful web sites for these city population numbers. Here is the official document published by the Serbian government with population data for all cities and places in Serbia from the last 2002 census:
 * http://www.szs.sv.gov.yu/Popis/PrviRez.pdf

PANONIAN  (talk)  00:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

http://www.szs.sv.gov.yu/Popis/PrviRez.pdf According to this document - Novi S. settlement has 190,602 but 'some' user personally added Petrovaradin and Sremska K. which resulted with larger population numbre. -- Gaston28

added romanian name
I added romanian name: (Romanian: Niş) -- Bonaparte  talk  14:28, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Demographic data
Demographic data in the infobox was taken from http://webrzs.statserb.sr.gov.yu/ --estavisti 17:02, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

The new city name
The new city name Nish it commes from albanien (north kosovo spoket) word Nish=1, Nomber One. Nish, dysh, tresh, katrshë ... one (or the first), second, ... --Hipi Zhdripi 03:33, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Absolute nonsense! There might be a similar word in Albanian, but it has nothing to do with the city's name.

Naissus i albanian njëshi i Lap Najshi--Hipi Zhdripi 01:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

ahah, Hipi, if that's so, then Tirana must have been the city of tyrants (serbocroatian: tiranin - tyrant, grad tirana - the city of the tyrants). Also, did you know how many exactly the same names of villages and towns exist in northern&central Serbia and southern Ireland? :) to get back serious, Nish as a settlement exists from the times when Celtic tribes existed in the region. There are theories that Roman name for the city, which was Naissus, is overtaken from the celtic inhabitants, and slightly changed to response to Roman latin pronounciation, as celtic name may be Navissus or Naviscus, which literaly translated from their language means 'the river that can be easy crossed' or in another theory 'the river of a girl with magic powers'. It's about river Nishava around which the city of Nish is based, so most logicaly comes that settlement took the name of a river, what's not uncommon in ancient ages (and anyway it has been the case for Nish as early as in Roman times). After disasters caused by Huns and other tribes in 4th/5th centuries, Naissus is only partly recovered and known as Nissus, and after Slavic tribes overtaking it, records mention it as Nish, and river Nishava. Chronicles from 12th century made by Crusaders mention the place as Nisch, which is even today the valid name of the city in German language.

changed handball club name
Handball club DIN recently changed it's name to Naisa.

250,000?!
Look at the - The city of Nis has 173,724 inhabitants...

Why population is overestimated in almost every town in Serbia?! First stories I hear from poeple from from Serbia: Belgrade - 2 million...Novi Sad and Nis - at least half a million each...I hoped that on an encyclopedia I won't find "wannabe megalopolis" syndrome... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nije bitno... (talk • contribs)


 * I don't believe "Citypopulation.de" is an official source of the population. There wasn't a census done since 2002 I believe...  I wouldn't be surprised if Belgrade does surpass 2 million with the refugees that have been coming in from Kosovo and various other places.  As for Novi Sad, it is estimated that there are half a million .  Where you live (Podgorica, pop. 137,000),  250,000 people might be considered a "megalopolis" or any other way you put it, but in other parts of the world, it would still be considered a smaller town. Regards, --   Krytan    T    C   01:28, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Citypopulation.de quotes official census data. With the kind of investment Podgorica gets as a capital city, today it looks more like megalopolis than any provincial town of Serbia...85.94.98.223 17:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * no wai

Population
Listen: Champ 000 or Gaston28 (what ever), this stupid revert war must to stop. I do not care if you want that your city is bigger than it actually is, but Wikipedia must use CORRECT data, not your wishes. Now, here are data published by the statistical office of Serbia from 2002 census:
 * City of Niš: 250,518 inhabitants. It was divided into two municipalities:
 * Municipality of Niš: 235,159 inhabitants
 * Municipality of Niška Banja: 15,359 inhabitants
 * Within Municipality of Niš there was also data for urban Niš - Niš (g), odnosno Niš grad, which had a population of 173,724.

Now, you must understand that first number listed there as "City of Niš" IS NOT A POPULATION OF URBAN NIŠ. "City of Niš" is a name of local unit of administration that include both, urban and rural areas, and, in English, it can be also called "municipal area", in another words, unit of local administration known as the "City of Niš" include the REAL city of Niš (urban Niš) and VILLAGES AROUND NIŠ. Now to explain you meaning of the terms: term "urban" describe the territory of REAL CITY (not of territory that is under administration of the city), while term "rural" describe settlements like villages that are not part of the real city. I hope that you understand this difference now (A ako sve to već znaš samo me zajebavaš da ti objašnjavam ove banalne stvari i ako ti je stvarni cilj vandalizovanje članka i namerno dezinformisanje ubacivanjem lažnih brojeva, nemoj da misliš da ću ti to dozvoliti. Šta si dosad uradio, uradio si, ali sa tim je sada gotovo...). PANONIAN  (talk)  23:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

- Ajde! Slusaj Mićo, optuzbe kojima nekoga optuzujes za kloniranje korisnickih naloga ces morati da dokazes. Ti proizvoljno interpretiras podatake, sto si dokazao kada si u slucaju NS cifru od priblizno 190 000 zamenio pribliznom cifrom od 215 000, a fraze ovakovog tipa "Šta si dosad uradio, uradio si, ali sa tim je sada gotovo..." rezervisi za krug tvoje porodice. Tamo ce te neko mozda i shvatiti ozbiljno. - Gaston28 14 June 2007

Rewrite
This article really needs to be rewritten from the economy section and downward. It's just a long, compelling list from that section. --Bolonium (talk) 22:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey? I saw a discusion about the former Bulgarian town Pirot, but i don't see the same about Nish?! Come on lets talk about real history... I didn't saw any article in the main page about the fact that Nish and Pirot was Bulgarian towns inhabitet predominantly by Bulgarians untill these lands was given to Serbia for compensation from Austro - Hungary. Please - read as many sources that you can an add this facts in the main page. And i dont want to put some nationalist propaganda because the Bulgarian inhabitants were asimilated long ago and the cities are Serbian with serbian population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.50.73.226 (talk) 10:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Why not to mention then chronicles from 1878-1884 written by famous writer Stevan Sremac who resided there at a time? He wrote about Nis being swallowed into quick transition from Turkish to Serbian system, people getting used to changes, etc, and he is not mentioning any ethnic Bulgarians living in the city and the area, other than local Serbian population being majority, and minorities of Turks, Cherkessians, Greeks, Jews, Armenians, Roma. Other than that, well known AustroHungarian historian Felix Kanitz, himself being ethnic Jew, who is well recognized for his objectivity more in Bulgaria than in Serbia (although his most famous works are on Serbs, Bulgarians, and Balkans generally), mentions no Bulgarians in Nis area and the city, in the times he has been visiting it (1860s - 1890s). Austrian army commanders who were holding Nis for about 13 months in Austrian - Ottoman wars in 1710s, mention local population being Serbian predominately, and Turkish/Cincar. Chronicles of Ottoman Turks from 1502 mention Nis being christian Serbian populated. Etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.200.238.246 (talk) 15:36, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry for reopening this after all this time, but there are in fact multiple references stating that Nish was a Bulgarian town. See for example here, here and here. And there are probably others, not to mention that Nish was actually part of the Bulgarian exarchate . I think this deserves to be mentioned in this article. Kostja (talk) 19:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, despite the assertion of the previous poster, Kanitz does mention Nish as being in Bulgaria (Bulgarien in the text): . 19:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Coordinates
Coordinates in header section does not match with coordinates in table below how to change toes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.200.194.228 (talk) 00:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Nis was formed by Drandans and it was capital of Dardania (Illyrian Kingdom of Dardania today Kosova) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.86.48 (talk) 14:28, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Greek colony
There was no Greek colony in Nis area. Please change this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.86.56.206 (talk) 15:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

population, again
I don't think it makes sense to say that Nis has "more than 253,077" inhabitants. A precise number from 2002 is given in the infobox anyway; for the introduction, I think that "more than 250,000" is clearer. --Austrian (talk) 16:00, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

"Nish" redirect?
Why does "Nish" redirect here exclusively? It shouldn't. Troglodyto (talk) 21:24, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

"Bubanj - Monument to the fallen Yugoslav WWII fighters." - total lie! It is monument to 10.000 killed there. There is small monument to fallen pilots in city --Alexmilt (talk) 15:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

"Memorial Chapel in the memory of NATO bombing victims - The chapel was built by City government of Niš (lead by DS/SPO, two democratic parties) while monument was built by the State government (lead by conservative SPS/SRS parties) in 1999. They are situated in Sumatovacka street near Nis Fortress." - it was NOT build by "lead by conservative SPS/SRS parties". it was build by prowest opposition that was leading town. There are one small monument 50m from that Chapel that was build by State —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexmilt (talk • contribs) 15:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

transportation section
I think this could use a transportation section? We could have things on public transportation, about the roads/highways that go through, and of course, the former Niš tram system. (LAz17 (talk) 05:07, 5 April 2010 (UTC)).

Proposed deletion of Komren


The article Komren has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Neighborhoods generally don't meet the requirements of WP:N, no mention of notability no references

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeepday (talk) 16:53, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Nis - picture
Someone please change the main picture of Nis, put some nice picture please! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.30.132.188 (talk) 18:21, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Transport
Niš is exactly located on the crossroads of many important communications connections, and we have no Transportation section in it? FkpCascais (talk) 03:55, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * That section is given on serbian wikipedia. Someone could translate it. --Alexmilt (talk) 10:32, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * OK. I´ll try to do it later today, or tomorow. Many thanks, great idea! FkpCascais (talk) 15:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Niš
OK, tonight I created this section that I complained because it was missing. I used the sr.wiki as reference but I allowed myself a bit of my personal "free-styile". Sorry, just joking, I added although some parts, but since I made it in rush please anyone feel free to correct it, expand it, or do whatever possible so it gets better. The city is quite an important crossroads place, so it deserves having a good transportation section. Said this, I only couldn´t properly include the following important part from the sr.wiki.:

"Кроз територију града пролазе три важна правца међународних путева и железница. Ниш је мултимодално чвориште највишег ранга у Европи. На овом подручју, укршта се више врста саобраћајних путева: коридор аутопута, железничке пруге, аеродром и планиране пруге за велике брзине, железничко чвориште, робно-претоварни центар, оптички каблови, транзитне централе, ТВ и ЦТ предајници, струјни далековод 400kV и гасовод."

Some parts are included in what I wrote, but some other important aren´t, as optic fibre cables and others. If anyone has time can add it to the text, if not I´ll try some other day with more time to do it properly. FkpCascais (talk) 04:18, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Help needed
Help needed in fixing and referencing all articles in Category:Neighborhoods of Niš. Each and everyone assisting will be granted with barnstar for help! By me! :) -- WhiteWriter speaks 18:04, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Sanjak of Niš
The Sanjak of Niš has its article now. I propose to find some way to add a wikilink to it.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:47, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Calculation
Niš succumbed to Turkish rule again in 1448 and remained thus for the following 245 years.

Austrian empire captured Niš in 1689, during Great Turkish War. 1689-1448= 241

I will replace above mentioned number of years (245) with 241.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:49, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Jsut to say I liked the article
Well written and the photos are great. 86.183.126.224 (talk) 19:40, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Number inflation reverted
I reverted standard messing with population figures by User:Captainrex0111. My apologies to User:Zoupan for reverting his changes in the process, but it was the simplest way to get the census data back. I'm a bit short of time at the moment, so feel free to restore them, or wait until I sort them out. Thanks for understanding. No such user (talk) 15:13, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Population, 2011
OK, let's do the math. The reference is. According to that, the urban population is equal to: Even if we count Niška Banja (which is not part of continuous urban core) with 14098, that does not amount to 220,000. Therefore, I'm changing the figure. No such user (talk) 11:03, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Duplicate weather box
Kindly explain why this particular article needs two weather boxes, and how is reader helped with a lot of unnecessary statistics, aka data cruft. As far as I can tell, no other article uses two sets of weather stats, and we could go on and on and include dozen of different data sets. The purpose of the weather box is to provide an illustration of annual climate to the reader, not the minutia of data statistics over a long range of years. If the two tables show slightly different averages, what are their purpose? No such user (talk) 09:38, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

The point of Wikipedia is to show the truth, not the preferences of individuals. These slightly different data will help the reader get a clearer picture of the local climate, as the RHMZ (serbian hydrometeorological authorities) has frequently been criticized by many experts in Serbia for reporting modified and untrue data in order to avoid emergency situations being declared because of extreme weather. It is not true that double weather boxes are uncommon, I have seen them on many pages. So, I kindly ask you, if you care about the truth, to keep the other weather box as well. Wish you all the best. Abu Najran (talk) 11:08, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


 * The point of Wikipedia is not to "show the truth", per WP:NOTEVERYTHING: Information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful. A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject, and per WP:INDISCRIMINATE Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information... Statistics that lack context or explanation can reduce readability and may be confusing. This page is supposed to give the reader a broad overview about the city of Niš, not all possible statistics about its one tiny aspect. The article will soon get unreadable if we include every tiny detail about the topic, a phenomenon known as Main article fixation. In particular, any controversy about RHMZ data belongs to the RHMZ article, which is a redlink, not into hundreds of city pages. And Climate of Niš, which might host two weather boxes, is also a redlink. The point of this article is to show one set of averages, whichever is more common elsewhere. I wouldn't mind much if you had replaced one dataset with another, but displaying two side by side is not acceptable. No such user (talk) 10:34, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Number inflation reverted again
, I'm tired with your messing with census numbers, and they will be reverted on sight unless you provide the exact method how you got them, right here. Serbian census 2011 does not show anything near your 226,301 figure no matter how you count. For the start, data about Niš in that document are on page 115 and not on 84-87 as you stated, which makes me further suspicious that you're making stuff up. Next thing I'll do is to ask for page protection lest you and your IP addresses stop this nonsense. No such user (talk) 08:18, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Urban population - city of Niš
Virgil018 (talk) Fist of all, I must apologize because I made a mistake when I was citing source regarding my calculation and that the correct pages are 114-116. I want to add urban population to the main page (article) since it's clearly missing. Only info that is provided is administrative and city proper population. Since other cities in Serbia, such as Novi Sad, have urban population info I think city of Niš is entitled to that too. According to Serbian census 2011, page 114-116, and according to https://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-ec/%D0%A1%D0%B0%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%9B%D0%B0%D1%98_%D1%83_%D0%9D%D0%B8%D1%88%D1%83, I calculated urban population of Niš by adding population of its urban settlements within the city's administrative borders and all the settlements within first two zones of public transportation. The following settlements are: Medijana Municipality - 85,969 inhabitants (settlement Brzi Bord is within second zone of public transportation on lines 1 and 3), Niška Banja - 4,380 inhabitants (settlement Niška Banja is within second zone of public transportation on line 1), Nikola Tesla - 4,651 inhabitants (settlement Nikola Tesla is within second zone of public transportation on line 1), Deveti maj - 4,795 inhabitants (settlement Deveti maj is within second zone of public transportation on line 10), Mramor - 635 (settlement Mramor is within second zone of public transportation on line 36), Niš(Palilula) - 54,597 inhabitants, Pasi Poljana - 2,938 inhabitants (settlement Pasi Poljana is within first zone of public transportation on lines 8 nad 8C), Suvi Do - 1,010 inhabiants (settlement Suci Do is within second zone of public transportation on lines 1 and 3), Čokot  - 1,412 inhabitants (settlement Čokot is within second zone of public transportation on line 10), Donje Međurovo - 1,722 inhabitants (settlement Donje Međurovo is within second zone of public transportation on line 10), Donja Vrežina - 6,758 inhabitants (this settlement is part of city proper area), Niš(Pantelej) - 34,724 inhabitants, Donji Komren - 1,838 inhabiants (settlement Donji Komren is within first zone of public transportation on lines 9 and 12), Gornji Komren - 917 inhabitants (settlement Gornji Komren is within first zone of public transportation on line 9), Medoševac - 2,674 inhabitants(settlement Medoševac is within first zone of public transportation on line 7) and Niš(Crveni Krst) - 12,516 inhabitants. When I add those up I get 221,536 inhabitans which is real representation of Niš's urban population and even more accurate than my previous calculations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Virgil018 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. However, I'm afraid that you involved a good deal of WP:Original research, which is not permitted on Wikipedia: you invented your own criteria for "urban" (being within a certain zone of public transportation) and then added up a lot of numbers:
 * For the start, according to page 113 of Serbian census 2011, the total urban population of all cities and towns within the Nišava District combined is 213,075, which is smaller still than your figure of 221,536, which involves a lot of logical errors (always on the side of inflation):
 * Medoševac (Niš) is not listed as a town in the Census;
 * Donja Vrežina is not listed as a town in the Census;
 * Donji Komren is not listed as a town in the Census;
 * Deveti maj is not listed as a town in the Census;
 * Medijana in Census is explicitly stated to have 81,327 urban and 4,642 other but you counted them both (Brzi Brod not listed as a town)
 * ...and so on. Now, looking at the map, I can see your point that most of those make up an almost contiguous residential area, and have typical suburban features (private housing mostly without agricultural facilities, centered along major roads) but we should not invent our own criteria (the statistical office has pretty stringent criteria what should be called a town (gradsko naselje)). As far as I know, we do not do so for other Serbian cities, so we should not for Niš either. No such user (talk) 10:43, 14 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Then I must ask why is there a urban area data displayed on the main page (article), since there is no source cited and then common sense begs the question why is urban population data missing since we supposedly know urban area. In that case only reliable data that is provided is regarding administrative and city proper areas and their respective population. —Preceding undated comment added 13:52, 14 November 2019 (UTC)  Virgil018 (talk)


 * Not sure I understand exactly what your mean. Serbian census 2011, page 115, specifies that the city proper (generally the same as "urban area") has 183,164 residents. For some reason, the article currently specifies 183,544, but that's a slight discrepancy I'm going to fix and properly cite. P.S, please sign your posts using four tildes at the end, like this: ~ No such user (talk) 16:12, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Virgil018 (talk)Virgil018

I also strongly reccomend that the following settlements must be added to the city proper population since according to Wikipedia they are described as parts of settlement Niš.


 * Pasi Poljana - 2,938 inhabitants Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasi_Poljana
 * Suvi Do - 1,010 inhabitants Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suvi_Do_(Ni%C5%A1)
 * Donji Komren - 1,838 inhabitants Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donji_Komren
 * Medoševac - 2,674 inhabitants Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medo%C5%A1evac_(Ni%C5%A1)
 * Donja Vrežina- 6,758 inhabitants Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donja_Vre%C5%BEina
 * Nikola Tesla - 4,651 inhabitants Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla_(Ni%C5%A1ka_Banja)
 * Brzi Brod - 4,642 inhabitants Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brzi_Brod
 * Niška Banja - 4,380 inhabitants Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ni%C5%A1ka_Banja

Proposition: Update Niš city proper area population to 212,055 inhabitants. (183,164 + following settlements above)

I made this proposition since I think Wikipedia should strive to provide its users with most accurate and correct data.

My point is that official government data is correct but city proper (urban) area isn't correctly mapped. I think we should always use logic and common sense to repesent all of our research data. I also want to add that urban area sources are missing and urban area should be removed from main article.

Virgil018 (talk) 16:25, 14 November 2019 (UTC)Virgil018


 * Per WP:WPNOTRS policy: "Wikipedia articles (and Wikipedia mirrors) in themselves are not reliable sources for any purpose". For example, the wording in Pasi Poljana was changed by an anonymous user back in 2017, without a source, so that's part of the answer why articles must not cite one another. For the Niš article, we have rather strong and official source - the census, and we should stick to it until the new one. No such user (talk) 16:44, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

'Chela Kula' Military Cemetery - any more information or help to add Commons images?
Some notable women (nurses, doctors) in the Serbian Scottish Women's Hospitals for Foreign Service (World War One) are buried in this cemetery, but it does not appear on the article for the city... or anywhere else that I can find in Wikipedia.

If someone has the ability to confirm it is the same place as https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:%C4%86ele-kula and add a free use Commons image of the Commonwealth grave section or individual graves

https://astreetnearyou.org/cemetery/2000164/CHELA-KULA-MILITARY-CEMETERY,-NIS

See Louisa Jordan and Margaret Neill Fraser and others listed on external link above.

Many thanks

Kaybeesquared (talk) 12:39, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess you are looking for the "Military Graveyard of the British Commonwealth". It is located some 500m from the Skull Tower (Ćele Kula). There is no article on English Wikipedia, but there are articles on Serbian (Ратно војно гробље Британског Комонвелта у Нишу) and French Wikipedia (Cimetière militaire du Commonwealth à Niš). See here for exact coordinates.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:37, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Edit ping-pong about "proto-Albanian" and contested sources
An IP editor has been removing certain material (this diff et seq). Although I initially reverted the removal, the IP raised a point about it being newly-added material. It was added just today by, a relatively new (<500 edits) editor.

I'm inclined to leave the material out of the article pending discussion, since the status-quo version of the article doesn't have it in. I have not yet looked at the sources; I've been more worried about the procedural side of things. —C.Fred (talk) 03:29, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Pinging to this thread. —C.Fred (talk) 03:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The bibliography in question, consisting of three sources, is this:


 * One of these is published by the Academy of Sciences and Arts of Kosovo, one is by the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, and one is by the University of California, Berkeley. Of course, it's possible that the sources are being misrepresented (and I have not looked through them either), but it certainly doesn't seem to me like these are prima facie unreliable (and it's obviously not true that the refs are "broken", as was claimed earlier). jp×g 03:40, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * One of these is published by the Academy of Sciences and Arts of Kosovo, one is by the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, and one is by the University of California, Berkeley. Of course, it's possible that the sources are being misrepresented (and I have not looked through them either), but it certainly doesn't seem to me like these are prima facie unreliable (and it's obviously not true that the refs are "broken", as was claimed earlier). jp×g 03:40, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * One of these is published by the Academy of Sciences and Arts of Kosovo, one is by the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, and one is by the University of California, Berkeley. Of course, it's possible that the sources are being misrepresented (and I have not looked through them either), but it certainly doesn't seem to me like these are prima facie unreliable (and it's obviously not true that the refs are "broken", as was claimed earlier). jp×g 03:40, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * One of these is published by the Academy of Sciences and Arts of Kosovo, one is by the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, and one is by the University of California, Berkeley. Of course, it's possible that the sources are being misrepresented (and I have not looked through them either), but it certainly doesn't seem to me like these are prima facie unreliable (and it's obviously not true that the refs are "broken", as was claimed earlier). jp×g 03:40, 5 November 2021 (UTC)


 * The very first point I’d like to make is that the IP editor in question has made 6 reverts on the same article in one day. If you look at the removal cited above, it states “controversial” and “Albanian nationalist pov” despite being properly sourced, scientific information. For starters, Matzinger and Prendergast are not even Albanian, with Matzinger being a well-renowned member of his respective field. By all means, please look through all three sources and see the content for yourself. I think this is simply a case of WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT as verifiable, sourced information is being dismissed with a manner of different personal claims. With all do respect, I also do not understand what my number of edits has to do with this conversation? What exactly is being implied here, sorry? Regards. Botushali (talk) 04:14, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree that the IP's edit summaries raised some big red flags. That's why I initially reverted them. When they pointed out it was newly-added information, I started looking a little closer at what was going on. This article is in a subject area that is prone to a lot of disruption, particularly by unregistered and new editors. The 500-edit threshold is significant because some articles are restricted to only be editable by users with 30 days of experience and 500 edits.
 * I still don't rule out that the IP might be editing in good faith, but my personal pendulum is swinging back, and I don't see the harm in leaving this material in the article. If the IP would like to put forward some discussion points about why the sources are flawed, I would love to see their comments here. —C.Fred (talk) 04:28, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed - rather than have baseless claims supposedly justifying reverts it would be more constructive for said user to actually present opposing opinions or to reasonably explain why exactly the sourced information I have used should be removed from the article. Even if there is a theory that contests the educated viewpoints I have inserted, it would only be right for both views to be represented within the article.
 * I also understand why the note about my number of edits was necessary, but I guarantee you I am not interested in vandalism or pushing unsourced claims; a look at my edit history will show that I prioritise the distribution of well-sourced, respectable content across a variety of articles, and I am simply just improving this article by adding sourced viewpoints. If the IP editor responsible for this edit-warring does indeed respond to this thread with genuine discussion points, I am more than happy to rebuttal them, but I see no reason as to why reliably-sourced information should be excluded from the article. Botushali (talk) 04:43, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

I've semiprotected the article. This is purely procedural, given the disruptive editing and IP block evasion. I have no opinion on whether the content belongs in the article, and editors with an interest are advised to continue the discussion and reach a consensus. -- Kinu t/c 04:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The IP is a sock of They are regularly targeting articles which are related to the Albanian language and history.  A rangeblock or a permanent protection should be considered.--Maleschreiber (talk) 15:35, 5 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Please remove pseudohistorical vandalization of this page. Albanian extreme nationalist have occupied a page about a city in Serbia. This is outrageous. FloydBG (talk) 16:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

This is cited to Prendergast (2017) p.80 but this isn't what the source actually says. It says: Prendergast is talking about languages. And prior to that he also writes:

I read the passage cited to Ismajli as well as Matzinger and basically they are saying that if there was traces of Albanian ancestry, we don't know where it came from, and the toponym Nish might be completely unrelated to Albanian. Basically inconclusive speculation. Devoting nearly an entire paragraph to this unproven and potentially fringe theory seems undue for this article. --Griboski (talk) 01:47, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * What bibliography discusses is that Slavic Niš acquired its phonological development via a Proto-Albanian mediation. Linguistic research doesn't discuss population movement. I have changed Prendegast (2017) to and added Rusakov (2017) - another source about Naissos > Nish. It's one of the most common etymologies.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:41, 8 November 2021 (UTC) --Maleschreiber (talk) 17:32, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * There is a serious wp:POV in name section, for example Matzinger rejects the "proto-Albanian" theory, and accepts that its taken either from Greek or from Latin.Alexikoua (talk) 20:18, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Matzinger writes the exact opposite. = It should be recognized that the Serbo-Croatian form Nîš cannot have originated from either a Greek or a Latin original formation. Ahmet Q. (talk) 20:51, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * That is fine, but the speculation over Albanian population movements (Ismajli) is excessive for the name section of this article. --Griboski (talk) 18:12, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I have removed 2 tags added by a newly registered user concerning the whole article but focused only on the name's section as inappropriate. Jingiby (talk) 18:37, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Can the admins and experienced editors remove Albanian pseudo history claims on toponym of name Niš? Its inappropriate and clearly push for political agenda and aspirations towards great Albania and its theory of legality. SerbGhoul (talk) 01:52, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You will need to get consensus among editors here that the information should be removed. It will help your case to present sources with an alternate etymology. —C.Fred (talk) 11:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Relevant bibliography considers *Naiss- > Nish as one most secure etymologies about Proto-Albanian. How that came to be is a matter of debate, hence the article discusses all possible pathways which led to this linguistic outcome as theories of individual scholars.--Maleschreiber (talk) 01:25, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Article vandalism
Could someone explain to me why are the sources from Albanian research institutions and authors more relevant and have precedence over citations from Serbian research institutions when it comes to Etymology of a Serbian city? Albanian scientific institutions are very young and their research is not really known or cited outside of Albanian scientific circles and on the contrary Serbian research institutions have existed for centuries. The fact that cited text exists, does not mean that the citations are actually reliable (which is especially the case when it comes from Albanian institutions).

Also, could Albanian users policing this article explain to me what is the point of your actions on this article? I come from the city in question I know the history of it very well and I can't really remember a part of history where Albanian people inhabited these areas, led alone had any part in formation of the name of the City of Niš. I could find some unreliable citations that say that Tirana was part of Serbia and that the name comes from Slavic language, but obviously I'm not going to do that as it makes no sense.

The fact that Wikipedia administrators also allow for this article to be vandalized in this way is very insulting to Serbian people and Wikipedia itself. I hope all users that took part in recent changes to the article will join this discussion in order to resolve this conflict.

--FootballFan986 (talk) 22:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * FootballFan986, Wikipedia is based on reliable sources, not on personal opinions. Jingiby (talk) 05:34, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I have worked as a scientist for almost 15 years/worked alongside some of the best minds in these areas of Europe and out of all the research papers I have red/worked on never have I seen a citation from an Albanian research institution (if they have any in the field I'm working in).
 * The fact that there are some citations does not necessarily mean they are accurate. I see that a lot of other articles had been changed, some pseudo-historic references added(sources from Albanian scientists of course) and I'm sure that some of the users here do not intend to stop with the edits.
 * And let's take a look at some parts of the paragraph in question:
 * "might indicate",
 * "might have moved",
 * "might have been",
 * "may also represent".
 * In fact-based scientific research we do not use "might" and "may" so excessively. Not to mention the fact that Albanian research institutions have existed for a couple of decades and that Serbian research institutions have existed for centuries and that their references can not have precedence over references coming from Serbian institutions when it comes to Etymology of a city that was only minorly inhabited by Albanian people in a very small timeframe of the History of the city.
 * I'm used to seeing propaganda coming from Albanian people on all sorts of platforms, but I didn't really expect to see that on a platform such as Wikipedia. The fact that Albanian users are policing this and other articles about Serbia and it's history in an immense amount says it all. You can spread propaganda as much as you'd like, you can buy a research paper or a PhD, but what you never can do is change History. FootballFan986 (talk) 21:36, 18 May 2022 (UTC)