Talk:List of regions of Serbia/Archive 1

Archive 1

Rewrite?

Panonian, in the context of our recent attempt on geographical categorization of Serbian geo-articles: I think this article could well serve as "main" article for future Category:Regions of Serbia. However, I think it currently misses the point: I'd expect that this article talks in general about Šumadija, South Serbia, Mačva, Stig, etc. The "proposed division" is OK in this context, but "Vojvodina", "Central Serbia" and "Kosovo" should go into Political divisions of Serbia; I would hardly call them "regions" except in the broadest sense.

I propose rewriting this article to include general information about regions in the above sense (however vague those definitions are). The "Proposed new regions" section might stay here or go to Political divisions of Serbia. What do you think? Duja 10:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

This was meant to be article about political regions (the existing ones and the proposed ones). You have also article named Geographical regions in Serbia for geographical regions. PANONIAN (talk) 11:39, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

But we don't have "political regions"? All information in this article is duplicated with the one of Subdivisions of Serbia. I don't see the purpose of this article. Duja 12:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

No, it is not duplicated. The "Subdivisions of Serbia" article speak about all subdivisions of Serbia (Regions, districts and municipalities), while this one speak about regions only (Central Serbia, Vojvodina, Kosovo), and about new proposed regions too. PANONIAN (talk) 12:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, "the regions only" (I find the term "region" highly inappropriate btw) are duly mentioned in Subdivisions of Serbia. As for "proposed regions", I fail to see why it cannot be a section within Subdivisions page (and I question its relevance too; AFAICT, it's an idea proposed by Democratic Party of Serbia that they themselves appear to have abandoned, and has a snowball's chance in hell to be implemented). Duja 11:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Maps

Regions of Serbia Regions of Serbia

Frankly, I don't like the new map. The regional borders are fuzzy, and there's a lot of overlap; painting it with distinct colors creates an impressions that those are some actual borders when there's none. It also fails to present overlapping regions (Posavina is part of both Srem and Mačva). By omitting the geographical background, it becomes unclear what are the basic toponyms for region naming (such as rivers and mountains) If there are some missing entries (Stari Vlah), it's better to ammend the existing map. Here are both, for comparison. Duja► 09:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Kosovo

Region

Kosovo is an independent and sovereign country. Please, exclude Kosovo as a region of Serbia, from this article.--Arbër (Let's Talk) 11:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Map

Kosovo is a sovereign and independent state. Therefore, Kosovo should not appear on Serbia's map. Please, update the maps. --Arbër (Let's Talk) 11:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

History of Kosovo

There is a section on the box "Republic of Serbia" about the History of Vojvodina and the History of Kosovo. While the former is a region that belongs to Serbia, the latter declared independence. Therefore, Kosovo's history should not appear anywhere in this article...--Arbër (Let's Talk) 11:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo is not undisputedly independent and especially not sovereign. After 60 years of the post World War II period it is crystalized: the only undisputed states are 192 UN member states + Vatican.

At the best, Kosovo is a disputed state. Furthermore, self-proclaimed independence per se means nothing (there are at least a dozen of well known cases on the planet at the moment). Recognized independence by number of states doesn't make one territory undisputed either (cases of Palestine or Western Sahara). Kosovo is not sovereign as it is occupied by foreign armies, has no authorities (completely or partially) in foreign affairs, defense, police, local administration, education, economy, etc. (there are foreign representatives and administrators for all of that). Some disputed states are de facto both independent and sovereign but not recognized (like Taiwan), some are de facto independent but not sovereign (Northern Cyprus, Caucasus republics) while there are countries undisputedly independent and members of the UN, but with highly reduced sovereignty, completely or partially (Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina). So, until Kosovo becomes a member state of the UN, the only thing that can be done on this list is to add a mark that regions within Kosovo (entirely or partially) are disputed areas. Btw, even those regions stretching within both Kosovo and Central Serbia have been removed by the previous edit. PajaBG (talk) 16:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't really agree with your viewpoint. Take, for instance, Israel. This country is not recognized by the member states of the Islamic Conference. However, the world's political map did change when Israel became a state. In addition, in order to hold a Neutral point of view, Wikipedia should change the political map of Serbia, by removing Kosovo.--Arbër (Let's Talk) 07:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Israel exactly confirms my point. It is a member of the UN, so a fact that IC doesn't recognize it has no impact on the Israeli status, just as has no impact IC's recognition of Palestine, which is not a UN member. When Kosovo becomes UN member, only then it could be said it is undisputed territory and not giving a damn if someone else calls it otherwise or not recognize it. Also, nobody is challenging a fact that real situation is that since 1999 Kosovo de facto is not ruled by Serbia (just as it is a fact that since 1990 Northern Kosovo is not ruled by Pristina or a fact that Kosovo lacks all the major [and some minor as well] elements of sovereignity). PajaBG (talk) 13:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Please clearly mark all sections that belong to Kosovo. I am adding a POV:KS flag until this is done. James Michael DuPont (talk) 05:28, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I explained that we dont need that weird tag that you created. I remove it, as on the lede we see "For the purpose of easier presentation in the tables, territory of Serbia is roughly divided into six geographical sections: northern, western, central, eastern, south-western and south. Thus, tables do not follow the political divisions, but the belonging of the regions to the provinces of Vojvodina and Kosovo is noted. Since the NATO bombing of 1999 and Albanian declaration of independence in February 2008, regions in Kosovo are part of the disputed area." And, one more. As none of your so called neutral edits are presented to Serbian state, or Serbian view, or international view, or any other view then pro-RoK, it is clear that those are not neutral edits. And, while official Serbian government dont change Serbian borders, we ill presented it like this. --WhiteWriter ^speaks 14:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)