Talk:United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo

Serb Propaganda
The following seemed to be Serb Propaganda, at least moderate-nationalist serbians viewpoint which is defintely not neutral.

"It is generally considered that, after five years of work (As of 2004), UNMIK failed in most of these tasks"

This is over-generalisation, without proving this statement that "generally considered UNMIK failed".

Basic civilian administrative functions is performed by local organs which are increasingly getting outside of UNMIK's control;

This, again without the vaild prove that kosovars joint administrators (that are delegated by UNMIK) is out of the UNMIK Out-of-Bound marker.

Establishment of substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo is not promoted; rather, all key political factors maintain that full independence of Kosovo as their immediate goal;

While its true that, most opinions views the key political elites are in favour of independence, it is not neutral since after the UNMIK arrived, they had not voice any moves of independence in their public speechs at least. (other than Kosovo crisis, Kosovo war and Milosevic's regime rule, where they did declare their independence). Further more, there is no talks in final status currently. How can we be sure they want independence NOW? or automony NOW? or even a republic in Serbia and Montenegro commonwealth? Unless you prove me wrong by proving from a non-bias realiable source as evidence. PLEASE DON'T ASSUME and jump into conclusion (through assuming).


 * Now I have to ask you to cite me when did UNMIK promoted "substantial autonomy and self-government". We can be sure that they want independence NOW because they said it. Nikola 15:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Other than that the rest are true and neutral IMO.

And please, other people are NPOVing all your articles about Kosovo.... Wikipedia is not for your propaganda. It's peoples' encylopedia. FYI (and some boasting ;> ) By the way I'm singaporean so i'm believe as a citizen of neutral country with multi-racial-and-cultural society i think my points are more neutral than yours with some (not all at least) of your Serbian extremist propaganda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.21.154.15 (talk • contribs) 04:08, 19 September 2004 (UTC)


 * Re-phrasing this sentence which is mere viewpoint ("generally considered") with no encyclopedic values and no vaild citation to account that phrase:
 * "It is generally considered that, after five years of work (As of 2004), UNMIK failed in most of these tasks:" --Cat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.2.91 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 21 September 2004 (UTC)


 * "It is generally considered that UNMIK failed" may be vague but is certainly more neutral than "UNMIK failed" but I'm OK with either. Nikola 15:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Well I don't agree (IMO) that is vague but rather to imply "generally", which if i'm not wrong you mean "most of the public" are blah blah blah...Which is misleading the audience. Thanks to point out that removing "generally" is still not neutral though, that one without the word "generally" is vague sentence not the other one without that word. --Cat12 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.2.91 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 23 September 2004 (UTC)


 * Whether is Serb propaganda or not, no comment on all except this:
 * Basic civilian administrative functions is performed by local organs which are increasingly getting outside of UNMIK's control;
 * If it's underground or shadow administrative institutions that it's not the "local organs" or "local authority delegated by UNMIK".
 * If it's delegated by UNMIK, may the community know which institution delegated by UNMIK is getting out of UNMIK limit? Please point to the reputable sources, not mere viewpoints.--Cat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.2.91 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 21 September 2004 (UTC)


 * Remove these sentence, which is not (again...) encyclopedic values but mere viewpoints, with no citations to account these statements.
 * Basic civilian administrative functions is performed by local organs which are increasingly getting outside of UNMIK's control;


 * This is of course true but I have no time to find a source so it could go for now. Nikola 15:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Establishment of substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo is not promoted; rather, all key political factors maintain that full independence of Kosovo as their immediate goal;
 * A political process to determine Kosovo's future status is not facilitated;
 * --Cat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.2.91 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 21 September 2004 (UTC)


 * If you can quote the source in the External links section to account this statement:
 * "There are 250,000 refugees from Kosovo who still can't return to their homes"--Cat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.2.91 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 21 September 2004 (UTC)


 * OK Nikola 15:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Thank you for showing gracious attitude in various ways, incl. not removing NPOV-dispute warning.
 * However Wikipedia is not for propaganda tools neither form both sides of the dispute, so I repeat, I don't take both sides (may I say Serbs and Albanians side?) anyway.
 * Keep up and CONTINUE your good statemenship.


 * The fact "Kosovo is part of Serbia and Montenegro" should be in this article not "Kosovo as part of Serbia ONLY" - it would be politically incorrect.
 * I don't see how it's politically incorrect, but I agree it's better to be more precise than less precise. Nikola 03:19, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * It's politically incorrect since Serbia is part of Serbia-Montenegro. Therefore Kosovo is part of Serbia within Serbia-Montenegro.--Cat12 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.2.91 (talk • contribs) 13:53, 26 September 2004 (UTC)


 * Added the link to document this:"Establishment of substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo is not promoted; rather, all key political factors maintain that full independence of Kosovo as their immediate goal;" General Election in Kosovo (November 16, 2001). Sorry for the removal of this point : it's true even forthcoming Kosovo Assembly Election most Albanians are aiming for independence, according to Dutch (not-so-reputable western) source.
 * So, I understand that we agree, and I have removed the dubious notice. Nikola 03:19, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Sure, though NB : it's from western source (Radio Netherlands) --Cat12 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.2.91 (talk • contribs) 13:53, 26 September 2004 (UTC)
 * Your citation about Kosovo refugees are not from reputable source (Serbian-Montenegro source), it would be better if you quote from international organizations. I'm also trying to replace the link i added.
 * --Cat12 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.2.91 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 23 September 2004 (UTC)
 * That source is accepted in a number of articles, is credible and it alone would suffice.
 * I have, however, managed to find an UNHCR source at www.unhcr.ch (.pdf). Relevant page is page 9 - "Indicative number of internally displaced persons". Nikola 03:19, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Rewording as "as part of Serbia and Montenegro", "Within the commonwealth of Serbia and Montenegro" too lengthly--Cat12 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.2.91 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 23 September 2004 (UTC)


 * I removed NPOV-warning i added since all contentious issues were resolved with citations. Thanks. --Cat12 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.2.91 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 26 September 2004 (UTC)

Comments by Hipi Zhdripi
officially Kosovo and Metohia

Is not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) 02:44, 29 April 2005 (UTC)

as part of Serbia and Montenegro

Is not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) 02:46, 29 April 2005 (UTC)

UNMIK
Everybody,who doesn´t accept UNMIK, but is writing for kosovo, is just making propaganda. it has nothing to do with english language. With people like that, i don t need to have a discussion. If you are able to accept UNMIK, than we can have a discussion.

First of all : UNMIK ! What does it mean ? UNMIK stands for United Nation Mission in KOSOVO. In Kosovo ! There are no words for Serbian teritory or things like that. If you would be so nice, to have a look to the homepage from UNMIK, you can see yourself : there are no words for Kosovo in serbian territory. They are just writing " ...in the war-ravaged province of Kosovo... " Than you can read this :
 * 1) perform basic civilian administrative functions;
 * 2) promote the establishment of substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo;
 * 3) facilitate a political process to determine Kosovo's future status;
 * 4) coordinate humanitarian and disaster relief of all international agencies;
 * 5) support the reconstruction of key infrastructure;
 * 6) maintain civil law and order;
 * 7) promote human rights; and
 * 8) assure the safe and unimpeded return of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes in Kosovo.

That means, Kosovo doesn t have a status( it s war - ravaged ! ). It s just a province, administrated by UNMIK,and nothing else. It doesn t belong to any other state or country. UNMIK is there to help the kosovars to decide for their future.Every other offical reference, like offical serbian - or offical albanian reference, is just propaganda. From that point of knowledge, our discussion is, like I would say Serbia or Albania is a province in China. All articles with the subject " Kosovo ", which have to do with information or references BEFORE the 10. june 1999 belongs to the article " History of Kosovo ". In an other case, I ll delete it, because i took it like propaganda and not like neutral information for Wikipedia. People in this discussion, who don t accept UNMIK, aren t neutral. They are living in an own dreamworld, what has nothing to do with reallity and they are using the Wikipedia for their own propaganda.

If somebody think, that I m wrong, please show me. But please argue with informations from an OFFICIAL document, accepted from UNMIK and not with an dokument from national offical propaganda informations. We can have a disskussion with facts from UNMIK, not with the past. Wikipedia stands for knowledge and shouldn t have to become a place for national propaganda, no matter if it s serbian or albanian propaganda. In other case serbian and albanian people will ravage it, like they ve ravaged Kosovo.--Hipi Zhdripi 20:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It was so long time, no body has profet the I am wrong.--Hipi Zhdripi 22:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

WP:LE tag
I removed the WP:LE tag because it doesn't seem to fit. Seems better off in UN EMT1871 10:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

number of displaced exaggerated
The figure of 250,000 displaced people from Kosovo is a Serbian government figure - that the UNHCR is obliged to use - and is exaggerated. The European Stability Initiative's 2004 report, The Lausanne Principle: Multiethnicity, Territory and the Future of Kosovo's Serbs http://www.esiweb.org/index.php?lang=tr&id=156&document_ID=53 has controversially estimated that there are perhaps only 65,000 Kosovo Serb IDPs living in Serbia (outside Kosovo). Certainly if there are 130,000 Serbs (the usual estimate) living in Kosovo, that would figure - the 1991 census figure for K Serbs was 195,301 plus 20,045 Montenegrins and it seems probable that numbers declined further after 1991. Howard Clark (talk) 08:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

UNMIK Pillar IV to stop operating
Today in Prishtina, the head of Pillar IV, announced that as of the 30th of June 2008 Pillar IV will stop operating and will hand over all of its duties to the government of Kosova. Here is the link in albanian, I am sure they will posted it in english on their site as well.

http://www.rtklive.com/?newsId=19898 Jawohl (talk) 11:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Info box removed? Why?
I did not get why the info box was removed. It contained and gave important info at one glimpse to the fast reader who does not want to get through the whole article to gather the info he wants. --Tubesship (talk) 13:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * What type of Infobox is most appropriate: UN mission (ie. Infobox UN), infobox: Country or Infobox: Former Country? Tlongers (talk) 08:58, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

not neutral
isnt saying ""representatives of the people of Kosovo" and didn't represent the Assembly itself" not neutral? i think that should be taken out, that is another discusion if they represented Kosovo or not, but this is about the UN mission --Gimelthedog (talk) 12:19, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

UNMIK still exists !
The opening sentence read "The United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo or UNMIK was the interim civilian administration in Kosovo, under the authority of the United Nations." That wording refers to UNMIK in the past tense as if it no longer exists. That is not correct. I've made some edits to make clear that it still exists...I've tried to be balanced about it - I don't say UNMIK is running the country/province today, but it is still the UN Mission in Kosovo. It's actual mandate is exactly the same today as it was in 1999. Obviously its day to day role is very different. Frenchmalawi (talk) 19:23, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Nice work! Thanks. bobrayner (talk) 20:46, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Synthesis and special pleading, again
Japinderum inserted this into the article again: However, the source says nothing of the sort. So, I have removed it. Multiple reliable sources put it quite simply; the assembly declared independence. It is unfortunate that several articles have had something very different put in them. bobrayner (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Whar are you saying, that is really not true. This explanation is in source, you maybe missed it. That was main reason for icj to say that declaration was legal, it would not be that it was declared by assembly. I will add more sources about this, but definition is almost identical to source! For more, see here. -- WhiteWriterspeaks 10:45, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Countless reliable sources simply talk about the assembly. You have reached into an obscure paragraph of a court document in order to cherrypick a sentence which puts caveats around the "assembly" in order to completely change the tone and pretend that it's illegitimate. That's a Bad Thing; not a Good Thing. bobrayner (talk) 20:55, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Infobox
Hi, UNMIK isn't a country, so why is it given a "country" infobox? One side-effect of using inappropriate infoboxes is that people try to shoehorn values into fields that don't really fit. UNMIK doesn't have its own capital city, coat of arms, currency, or "sovereignty". The latter value is now "UN protectorate over APKiM" which is very different to the reality on the ground. bobrayner (talk) 21:24, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Because "country" is merely a short name for the template. The template is widely used for a variety of non-countries such as African Union, Principality of Sealand, Christmas Island because it is a convenient way to present standardized information.  If you prefer, we could use Template:Infobox Country or territory, which is a redirect.
 * As for your other points, I disagree:
 * The UNMIK did have an administrative centre in Pristina. If you don't like the "capital" terminology, the template is fully customizable.  The label can be changed to "Headquarters" or "Administration centre" or something else that you deem to be more appropriate.
 * If you don't like referring to the UNMIK emblem as a "Coat of Arms" this too can be fully customized to terminology which you find more acceptable.
 * The UNMIK did regulate the use of the euro in Kosovo:.
 * The UNMIK did exercise sovereignty over Kosovo.  Are you trying to argue that Serbia still had sovereign control over Kosovo from 1999-2008?  If not Serbia, then who?
 * The UNMIK was established as a protectorate over APKIM, I don't think this is in dispute. Formally that is still the case as the mandate has not been changed.  While obviously things have changed on the ground since 1999, the UNMIK has taken a status neutral approach so I'm not sure what your point is.
 * I'll have a go at tweaking some of the parameters to address the concerns you have raised here. TDL (talk) 22:10, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * We do, however, have Infobox United Nations. That would be a better fit, since UNMIK is a UN mission, not a country. bobrayner (talk) 22:27, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No one has ever said it was a country, and neither does the article or template, so continuing to cite that red herring, rather than actually addressing the issue, is not helpful.
 * The UN template isn't capable of doing what we need. How would we show the flag and map?  Where would we list the PISG/EULEX establishment?  TDL (talk) 23:36, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * "Nobody ever said it was a country"? Well, apart from the infobox country template, and the fields which are specific to countries rather than UN missions...
 * If you don't want to call it a country, and I don't want to call it a country, how about we use an appropriate infobox? Or just do without. bobrayner (talk) 21:04, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Except the premise of your argument, that the fields are specific to countries, simply is not true. The template has been specifically designed for just such organizations, which is why it is so widely used for non-countries.  If you think that such usage is not appropriate, then we have a lot of deleting to do.  I'd suggest starting a discussion at the template talk page rather than here.
 * Since you don't seem to be able to get past the name of the template, I've addressed this. We now use: Infobox geopolitical organisation.  Problem solved!  Do you have any problems with specific parameters in the infobox?  If so, I'm sure they can be addressed.  TDL (talk) 23:02, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 one external links on United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120304055530/http://www.newkosovareport.com/20071127235/Business-and-Economy/KTA-only-Kosovo-Institutions-can-privatize-Brezovica.html to http://www.newkosovareport.com/20071127235/Business-and-Economy/KTA-only-Kosovo-Institutions-can-privatize-Brezovica.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090703085608/http://www.unmikonline.org:80/archives/EUinKosovo/uk/about/about_bios.php to http://www.unmikonline.org/archives/euinkosovo/uk/about/about_bios.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110629013848/http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070202/ts_afp/serbiakosovounstatusproposal_070202162726;_ylt=Ap9g4N..BOD23p6b5WY2sqsXxHcA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl to http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070202/ts_afp/serbiakosovounstatusproposal_070202162726;_ylt=Ap9g4N..BOD23p6b5WY2sqsXxHcA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120319112437/http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070310/wl_nm/serbia_kosovo1_dc_4;_ylt=AvL5xEUliSVd9RrxZLjpSI8XxHcA to http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070310/wl_nm/serbia_kosovo1_dc_4;_ylt=AvL5xEUliSVd9RrxZLjpSI8XxHcA
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120525235352/http://www.crisisgroup.org/library/documents/europe/balkans/177_kosovo_status___delay_is_risky.pdf to http://www.crisisgroup.org/library/documents/europe/balkans/177_kosovo_status___delay_is_risky.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:49, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 one external links on United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20141223075446/http://www.eulex-kosovo.eu:80/en/info/whatisEulex.php to http://www.eulex-kosovo.eu/en/info/whatisEulex.php
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131022143615/http://www.ico-kos.org/f/pdf/COMMUNIQUE16thISG-Eng.pdf to http://www.ico-kos.org/f/pdf/COMMUNIQUE16thISG-Eng.pdf
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5rRB9e3bz to http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/15987.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071013123632/http://web.amnesty.org:80/actforwomen/stories-9-eng to http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/stories-9-eng
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070930014538/http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2006/July_26/1.html to http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2006/July_26/1.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070318160637/http://news.yahoo.com:80/s/ap/un_kosovo to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/un_kosovo;_ylt=As7I249q_nofClx8rnKE6LYXxHcA
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071013123632/http://web.amnesty.org:80/actforwomen/stories-9-eng to http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/stories-9-eng
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080216011030/http://www.unmikonline.org/press/reports/N9917289.pdf to http://www.unmikonline.org/press/reports/N9917289.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071013123632/http://web.amnesty.org:80/actforwomen/stories-9-eng to http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/stories-9-eng

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:13, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070310/wl_nm/serbia_kosovo1_dc_4%3B_ylt%3DAvL5xEUliSVd9RrxZLjpSI8XxHcA
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150518102355/http://www.kosovo.undp.org/repository/docs/EWR15FinalENG.pdf to http://www.kosovo.undp.org/repository/docs/EWR15FinalENG.pdf

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) 21:55, 26 July 2017 (UTC)