Talk:Outline of Kosovo

Tips for developing country outlines
Instructions for developing country outlines is located at Outlines (while that section is complete, the page is a draft, and will be moved to the Wikipedia namespace when completed).  Th e Tr ans hu man ist  21:45, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

A note concerning redlinks...
Many of the entries (and their links) are standard across all of the country outlines, to aid readers, especially young readers, in comparing countries to each other.

So if this country doesn't have any of a particular entry, like navies, please don't delete the entry. Instead, complete it with "none" (and a brief explanation as to why, for example, "- x is a landlocked country with no ports"). If the explanation exists in an article on Wikipedia, then click on the redlink and create a redirect to that location. See Redirect, WP:Section linking, and Help:Section.

Standard redlinks (article names) were also chosen based on how country coverage tipically expands. This makes the standard names for these subtopics widely available and easily accessible. So please do not remove those redlinks, for they will turn blue eventually. In the meantime, they can be redirected to the section of whatever article has the relevant information, if any. See Redirect, WP:Section linking, and Help:Section.

Thank you.

 Th e Tr ans hu man ist  21:45, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

P.S.: To discuss the standard design of the country outlines, or of outlines in general, do so on the Outline of knowledge WikiProject talk page.

Guidelines for outlines
Guidelines for the development of outlines are being drafted at Outlines.

Your input and feedback is welcomed and encouraged.

 Th e Tr ans hu man ist  21:45, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Please check and fix the government section
The government section needs to be checked for accuracy. The initial data placed in the government branches sections was generated by template, and the data didn't fit all countries.

So those sections need to be looked over, and fixed if needed.

Please help.

Thank you.

 Th e Tr ans hu man ist  21:45, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

P.S.: If you'd like to help out with other tasks concerning Wikipedia's Outline of knowledge, please drop me a note on my talk page.

Is this about the self-proclaimed republic or the land?
Since the lede begins (at the time of my writing) with the following passage:


 * The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to Kosovo, a territory in the Balkans. See also Kosovo (region).

I have valid reason to assume that the page is geographical and not about either of the entities to contest the region. As such, any answer to questions such as "official name" has two recognised answers. I believe that any attempt by any editor whatsoever to remove one variation with the intent of projecting the other without regard for the wider situation is in breach of several policies. --Oranges Juicy (talk) 08:36, 11 July 2015 (UTC) Oranges Juicy's recent edit here has already been pointed out as problematic, because it gives parity to APKiM and the Republic of Kosovo, calling them both "claims", even though one is an real country and the other is a fantasy which doesn't exist on the ground. Further, it is frustrating that Oranges Juicy ignores WP:BRD and just hammers the revert button whilst pretending that nobody has ever pointed out the problem. I do hope the community won't tolerate this tendentious editing for much longer. Perhaps Oranges Juicy could try using talkpages in future, instead of just reverting over and over. bobrayner (talk) 08:40, 11 July 2015 (UTC) Mmm. One could say that the post-2003 pro-west Iraqi regime in its northwest is a "fantasy which doesn't exist on the ground" since ISIS took control but that has no influence over the state's constitution. One can argue the same about any breakaway state that is controlled in whole or in part by its proponents. In the end of the day, the Autonomous Province is anything but a fantasy. It continues to stand within the Serbian constitution so the fact that it no longer designates personnel for the region is down to its own agreements in discussions with Priština. Of course if it did, you'd simply have an authority in exile much like the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia (Georgia's claim). In the end of the day, Kosovo is a disputed territory. Now I accept that there may be the occasional editor that disagrees with this and he is entitled to his own opinion. All I can recommend he do is see to its removal from List of territorial disputes. As for WP:NPOV, it clearly states the following per WP:ASSERT.


 * Indicate the relative prominence of opposing views. Ensure that the reporting of different views on a subject adequately reflects the relative levels of support for those views, and that it does not give a false impression of parity, or give undue weight to a particular view. For example, to state that "According to Simon Wiesenthal, the Holocaust was a program of extermination of the Jewish people in Germany, but David Irving disputes this analysis" would be to give apparent parity between the supermajority view and a tiny minority view by assigning each to a single activist in the field.

There is no supermajority view over Kosovo.

Also, per WP:FRINGE:


 * The governing policies regarding fringe theories are the three core content policies, Neutral point of view, No original research, and Verifiability. Jointly these say that articles should not contain any novel analysis or synthesis, that material likely to be challenged needs a reliable source, and that all majority and significant-minority views published in reliable sources should be represented fairly and proportionately . Should any inconsistency arise between this guideline and the content policies, the policies take precedence.

80 countires including all five BRICS recognise the APKiM, they alone represent 40% of the world population. As for the other 75 states, it tops one half hands down.

So how's that for "we should not have parity". --Oranges Juicy (talk) 08:58, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Here is what I have done to level the playing field on Outline of Serbia (less two .bot edits). --Oranges Juicy (talk) 09:09, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Quick explanation of Wikipedia outlines
"Outline" is short for "hierarchical outline". There are two types of outlines: sentence outlines (like those you made in school to plan a paper), and topic outlines (like the topical synopses that professors hand out at the beginning of a college course). Outlines on Wikipedia are primarily topic outlines that serve 2 main purposes: they provide taxonomical classification of subjects showing what topics belong to a subject and how they are related to each other (via their placement in the tree structure), and as subject-based tables of contents linked to topics in the encyclopedia. The hierarchy is maintained through the use of heading levels and indented bullets. See Outlines for a more in-depth explanation. The Transhumanist 23:56, 8 August 2015 (UTC)