Talk:Timeline of Kosovo history

see my other history notes page

I imported a bunch of dates from my page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mdupont/List_of_religious_places_in_Prizren

I spent 1 week on that time line it needs work, like i have all the mosques and churches of prizren in there they might need more explanation etc but it is a good start for understanding the history, putting the churches on the time line —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdupont (talk • contribs) 15:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

please dont delete

We need to add in the external sources. I kindly ask you to give us some time to do so. it will take a week to review the entries and find sources for them. until then, dont delete this page. thanks, mike Mdupont (talk) 10:30, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

more sources

please add these sources

http://sofiaecho.com/2008/02/17/656689_kosovo-a-timeline-of-independence

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/country_profiles/3550401.stm

http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eur/fs_kosovo_timeline.html

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/kosovo-timeline1.html

http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/special/kosovo/contexts/timeline

http://www.mapreport.com/countries/kosovo.html

http://www.google.de/search?q=kosovo+timeline&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=com.ubuntu:en-US:unofficial&hs=ZdK&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=lnChSte3FJLKmgPFvfnxDw&sa=X&oi=timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=11 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdupont (talk • contribs) 19:58, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

References

Ok the article was full of links and non Refs like interwiki's and other inappropriate stuff.If you are interested in editin the article use references from books from reliable writers.Concentrate after 1300 and except very important events that effect the region write what has to do with Albanians in this place.Megistias (talk) 22:08, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Someone better find the first instance of Albanians in Kosovo.Some medieval writer.Megistias (talk) 22:36, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

sources of those mosques

I added a bunch of sources here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mdupont/List_of_religious_places_in_Prizren

Moravian_Serbia

   * Information Service of the Serbian Orthodox Church
   * List of damaged buildings
   * reconstruction information
   * [5]
   * list of monastaries
   * The Diocese of Ras-Prizren and Kosovo-Metohija
   * Photographs of damaged churches
   * History of churches of Kosovo
   * Special Protective Zones

  1. ^ http://www.archive.org/stream/worldshistorysur05helmuoft/worldshistorysur05helmuoft_djvu.txt
  2. ^ http://www.archive.org/stream/worldshistorysur05helmuoft/worldshistorysur05helmuoft_djvu.txt
  3. ^ http://www.m-p-c.org/history/history.htm
  4. ^ http://books.google.com/books?id=QDFVUDmAIqIC&pg=PA380&lpg=PA380&dq=prizren+1453+history&source=bl&ots=8BjcM-8Vap&sig=cXEJtKVXAg6oDvijHwssXCew87A&hl=en&ei=o6mGSoHBE4af_Aa5ntmlBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#v=onepage&q=&f=false
  5. ^ http://www.m-p-c.org/history/history.htm
  6. ^ http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro57.htm
  7. ^ http://www.mzv.cz/tirana/en/about_albania/history_and_chronology_of_events_in.html
  8. ^ http://www.montenet.org/history/balsics.htm
  9. ^ http://www.serbianunity.net/culture/history/Hist_Serb_Culture/Sima_Cirkovic.html
 10. ^ http://www.kosovo.net/histkim.html
 11. ^ http://www.serbianunity.net/culture/history/Hist_Serb_Culture/Sima_Cirkovic.html
 12. ^ http://www.montenet.org/history/balsics.htm
 13. ^ http://macedonia.wikidot.com/themedievalhistoryofmacedonia
 14. ^ http://www.m-p-c.org/history/history.htm
 15. ^ http://www.kosovo.net/histkim.html
 16. ^ http://books.google.com/books?id=QDFVUDmAIqIC&pg=PA514&lpg=PA514&dq=prizren+1409&source=bl&ots=8BjcM-3Z9o&sig=JdtheX6M-wyJDqDs13w5EoRnY-M&hl=en&ei=oJeGStmFB5CMsAbLibz8Bw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5#v=onepage&q=prizren%201409&f=false
 17. ^ http://www.geckogo.com/Guide/Albania/People-Culture/History/
 18. ^ http://macedonia.wikidot.com/themedievalhistoryofmacedonia
 19. ^ http://macedonia.wikidot.com/themedievalhistoryofmacedonia
 20. ^ http://www.geckogo.com/Guide/Albania/People-Culture/History/
 21. ^ http://www.kosovo.net/esarhangel.html
 22. ^ http://www.albanian.com/main/countries/kosova/prizren/index.html
 23. ^ http://www.albanian.com/main/countries/kosova/prizren/index.html
 24. ^ http://www.ecoi.net/file_upload/1504_1220513623_law-on-special-protective-zones.pdf Special Protective Zones
 25. ^ http://portal.unesco.org/es/files/23707/11011375003Kosovo_Mission_Report_2.pdf/Kosovo%2BMission%2BReport%2B2.pdf
 26. ^ http://www.st-george-church.org/English/Kosovo_News.htm
 27. ^ http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=23707&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
 28. ^ http://www.ecoi.net/file_upload/1504_1220513623_law-on-special-protective-zones.pdf Special Protective Zones
 29. ^ http://www.rickosovo.org/RIC%20-english/Sites%20Church14.htm
 30. ^ http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=30946604
 31. ^ INTEGRATED REHABILITATION PROJECT PLAN /SURVEY OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE (IRPP/SAAH) Regional Programme for Cultural and Natural Heritage in South East Europe 2003 - 2008 FEASIBILITY STUDY Document adopted by the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Serbia on 20 November 2007 http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/regional/SEE/IRPPSAAH/FS/FS_KosovoUNMIK_CathedralStGeorgePrizren_APP.pdf
 32. ^ http://www.chwb.org/kosovo/english/newschurches.htm
 33. ^ http://www.rickosovo.org/RIC%20-english/Sites%20Church7.htm
 34. ^ www.spc.org.yu/Vesti-2004/03/list-23-3-04-e.html -Serbian Orthodox Church
 35. ^ http://portal.unesco.org/es/files/23707/11011375003Kosovo_Mission_Report_2.pdf/Kosovo%2BMission%2BReport%2B2.pdf
 36. ^ http://www.rickosovo.org/inc/eng/sites/st_kyriake_prizren.html
 37. ^ http://www.rastko.net/mnemosyne-2003/26_fr_conclusion_long-term.pdf
 38. ^ http://www.collegeart.org/pdf/BalkanHeritageDestruct.pdf
 39. ^ http://www.kosovo.net/esarhangel.html
 40. ^ http://www.archive.org/stream/bookofhistoryhis08bryciala/bookofhistoryhis08bryciala_djvu.txt
 41. ^ http://www.archive.org/stream/macedonia00dorduoft/macedonia00dorduoft_djvu.txt
 42. ^ http://portal.unesco.org/es/files/23707/11011375003Kosovo_Mission_Report_2.pdf/Kosovo%2BMission%2BReport%2B2.pdf
 43. ^ http://www.kosovo.net/ecreka.html
 44. ^ http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/regional/SEE/IRPPSAAH/FS/FS_KosovoUNMIK_ChurchStSaviourPrizren_APP.pdf
 45. ^ abib ahmedi Theranda-Prizreni Ndër Shekuj pg 238
 46. ^ extracted from
 47. ^ Council of europe Integrated Rehabilitation Project Plan/Survey on the Architectural and Archaeological Heritage (IRPP/SAAH) http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/regional/SEE/documents_en.asp
 48. ^ http://www.st-george-church.org/English/Kosovo_News.htm
 49. ^ http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=23707&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
 50. ^ http://www.ecoi.net/file_upload/1504_1220513623_law-on-special-protective-zones.pdf Special Protective Zones
 51. ^ http://www.travelkosova.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=print&sid=7
 52. ^ http://www.birn.eu.com/en/62/10/1843/
 53. ^ http://westsrbdio.org/decani/decani_monastery.html
 54. ^ http://www.discoverserbia.org/sr/raska-i-ibarska-dolina/manastir-crna-reka
 55. ^ http://www.discoverserbia.org/sr/raska-i-ibarska-dolina
 56. ^ http://books.google.com/books?id=Fnbw1wsacSAC&pg=PA84&lpg=PA84&dq=Crna+Reka+kosovo&source=bl&ots=vyI_klEmT2&sig=IpRc2hz8TZFzQcroB4tmNJKLby8&hl=en&ei=YLiESr3cHJqknQO0lOjnBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9#v=onepage&q=Crna%20Reka&f=false
 57. ^ http://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-el/%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%80_%D0%A6%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%A0%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%B0
 58. ^ http://www.mancr.org/
 59. ^ http://westsrbdio.org/decani/decani_monastery.html
 60. ^ http://portal.unesco.org/es/files/23707/11011375003Kosovo_Mission_Report_2.pdf/Kosovo%2BMission%2BReport%2B2.pdf
 61. ^ http://web.mit.edu/most/www/ser/kos/shrines1.html
 62. ^ http://www.mfa.gov.yu/FDP/270303_e.html
 63. ^ http://www.zeriislam.com/bibliografia/NexhatI.html
 64. ^ http://www.eparhija-prizren.com/defaultE.asp?s=vesti&idvestep=650
 65. ^ http://www.archive.org/stream/livesofserbiansa00janirich/livesofserbiansa00janirich_djvu.txt
 66. ^ http://www.serbianunity.net/culture/history/Serb_History/Rulers/index.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdupont (talk • contribs) 21:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC) 

Recent changes

I added extra information about the movements of Kosovo as both a land and a political unit. Some things had to be removed such as the independence of Albania and the recognition of it in 1913 (Treaty of London). This event is not directly relevant to any Kosovan subject. Evlekis (talk) 18:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Skanderbeg

Somebody added information about Skanderbeg in this article. Can anybody explain why are informations about Skanderbeg relevant for Kosovo history?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:38, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

1406

It reads:"1406 Stefan defeated and killed his brother-in-law Bayezid I's son Musa during the Battle of Despotovac in 1406. After the battle, Serbia had peace with the Ottomans for a long time."

Well, Musa died in 1413, not in 1406. (see Musa Çelebi and Ottoman Interregnum). I'll call the editor. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 11:49, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

No feedback to my remark.I'll clear out the event of regerding Musa Çelebi. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 14:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, so why dont you fix the entry. Is the date wrong? Musa died in 1413? what about this ? "1406 Stefan won the Battle of Despotovac in 1406. After the battle, Serbia had peace with the Ottomans for a long time. Stefan Lazarević."

Stefan Dušan

With this edit User:Majuru extended the title of Stefan Dušan from Serbs and Greeks to Bulgarians and Albanians.

The main article about Stefan Dušan explains that his title was "Tsar of the Serbs and Romans" (Romans is equivalent to Greeks in Serbian documents).

I think that this assertion is supported with so many works that it is safe to conclude there is scientific consensus about it. Also, numerous reliable sources dispute his title being extended from Serbs and Greeks to include Albanians and Bulgarians too. Inclusion of Albanians and Bulgarians is not supported by scientific community and should not be presented as undisputed fact. Majuru, I propose you to look at article about Stephen Uroš IV Dušan of Serbia and taking in consideration above mentioned facts revert your above mentioned edit.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:06, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

You cannot use Wiki as a source for Wiki. The denomination was sourced. By the way, De administrando imperio will be removed, because Dresneik = Bresnik (Plevlje, Novi Pazar) [1]. Majuru (talk) 14:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

I did not used wiki as a source for wiki. I pointed to the practice of the main article which is result of the consensus based on the sources.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:37, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

I removed large parts of unreferenced material, hoping to remove also the "multiple issues". Majuru (talk) 15:51, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

What you did can be seen as blatant vandalism and POV pushing. You removed information about Serbian Despotate (which included Kosovo) and its despots and disguised your edits by removing some unreferenced text altogether. It is very disruptive and should be sanctioned at sight.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:06, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, they were not referenced. The article has multiple issues, they should be dealt with.Majuru (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

You don't reference that sky is blue. I don't intend to participate in your game here, but I do expect that your disruptive edits will be sanctioned.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:29, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Ducellier

To be used. [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majuru (talk • contribs) 20:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Rewrite underway

This article is currently being rewritten as part of Wiki Academy Kosovo. The draft for that sits at User:Eurisarukovci/Timeline of Kosovo history. Eurisarukovci (talk) 13:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

We've just pasted the draft, any comments and improvements are of course welcome. Eurisarukovci (talk) 15:54, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

The draft should first be approved before such major changes per Wikipedia:Editing policy. I will restore the stable version. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Territory which belongs to Albanians 600 years before Albanians were mentioned for the first time? Serb rulers are deleted without any explanation? Any help with this article is, of course, highly appreciated. Pushing certain nationalistic POV would not be constructive. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Per WP:BOLD, there is no requirement for such prior discussion. Also, the stable version has had a stable warning of multiple issues for over three years. It's past time something changed. Accusations of nationalism don't meet WP:AGF. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

There is such requirement per Wikipedia:Editing policy. Per WP:BOLD there is a requirement to discuss after revert. Not to edit war. Territories which are Albanian 600 years before Albanians were mentioned for the first time with removal of Serb rulers is hardly a way to resolve issues which are result of tag-bombing of this article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:53, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure where you are seeing such a requirement in that page; perhaps you could clarify? Given that neither I nor the original editor are edit warring with you, I'm also not sure what point you;re trying to make in that regard. As to your final point, it was of course open to you to restore individual items the former version without a wholesale revert. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Clarification: Be cautious with major changes: consider discussing them first. With large proposed deletions or replacements, it may be best to suggest changes in a discussion, to prevent edit warring and disillusioning either other editors or yourself (if your hard work is rejected by others). One person's improvement is another's desecration, and nobody likes to see their work "destroyed" without prior notice. If you choose to be very bold, take extra care to justify your changes in detail on the article talk page. This will make it less likely that editors will end up reverting the article back and forth between their preferred versions. To facilitate discussion of a substantial change without filling up the talk page, you can create the new draft in your own userspace (e.g. User:Example/Lipsum) and link to it on the article discussion page. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:52, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

The editor who started the edit war (User:Keithstanton) is blocked. The editor who performed major change (User:Eurisarukovci) confirmed that he was in the meantime informed that he was wrong when he replaced the stable version of the text with his draft. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:00, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes; that's what I read: again I see nothing there making a requirement. Eurisarukovci, being a new editor, may have believed your assertions, but I do not. Your claim there that "You should not remove the text of the existing timeline" is without foundation. The blocked editor has made only one recent edit to this article (hardly a war). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, you are right. That is not a requirement of the policy but recommendation.
• Yes, you are right that blocked editor reverted only once after BRD cycle, instead to discuss. It is probably not an edit war. Just an edit battle. Does it make much difference?
• Removed text of stable version contained many referenced assertions. It was wrong to remove it without any explanation. Believe it or not.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:13, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

• Major information has been deleted, notably regarding Serbian history of Kosovo. Secondly, several new entries have nothing to do with Kosovo. Rv to stable version.--Zoupan 05:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• Several new entries have nothing to do with Kosovo, but many of the old entries also have nothing to do with Kosovo like those that detail the participation of Serb vassals of the Ottomans in their campaigns. Btw can we agree not to have entries about buildings? This is a very general overview that should cover essential events that had a fundamental impact in the region.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 14:12, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Everything that was edited before the "stable" version had to do with Kosovo. If something is missing, please feel free to contribute, and not remove all the relevant data that has been added. 05:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, we can agree not to have entries about buildings unless they are notable important monuments of culture or religion. Please clarify what Serb vassals do you refer to?—--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:41, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I would say 80% of the "Greater Albania" revision until the 19th century has nothing to do with Kosovo. The rest of the information can be added to the original revision. Please discuss which entries in the stable version that should be deleted. This is the last warning before Admin intervention.--Zoupan 00:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Timeline of the Greater Albania

With this edit IP editor again performed major changes contrary to editing policy and again introduced many violations of NPOV which, besides already explained flaws, include many events unrelated to Kosovo but to Albania, like Skanderbeg, Frasheri brothers, Girolamo de Rada, Ottoman capture of Albania, noblemen from Albania, territory which is referred to as Albanian centuries before Albanians were recorded in historical sources for the first time... how parliament in Belgrade de-facto recognized Kosovar sovereign territorial integrity, false claim of Serbian Orthodox Church that Kosovo Serbs are being subjected to an Albanian program of genocide, .... This violation of NPOV policy is disruptive and can not be justified with lack of references for some assertions in stable version of the article. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:40, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with user Antidiskriminator - changes made to the article are in clear violation of NPOV policy. Perunova straža (talk) 22:42, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Well Kosovo was part of Albania. Frasheri Brothers, Girolama de Rada, Skanderbeg, the all had an very important role in the albanian History. Skanderbeg was the Hero that fought against the Ottoman Empire to defend those lands. Girolamo de Rada and the Frasheri brothers they have a main role in the Renesance of albanian literature, spreading the albanian aspirations of an albanian population...And all the facts that are writen in the new timeline are with references and citations despite the old "Stable" timeline. And what about the war of the Serbia against the Ottoman Empire...Hello, the timeline is about Kosovo...and if you really think that the dates of Religious Buildings being built in Kosovo is important for the History, I don't agree to your opinion. If you really want to put the somewhere, then start a new article about the Architecure of Kosovo...As for the migration, its a fact documented in lots of archives.Thank you very much for reading. And don't delete it. You can put some information that you think is needed, but it has to be something about KOSOVO history. And please write the references and citations too... (Arbnorgashi (talk) 01:00, 5 March 2013 (UTC))

If "they had an very important role in the albanian History" you can add them to the text of Timeline of Albanian history. Like you said yourself: "the timeline is about Kosovo". --Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:38, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, and the most interesting fact is that We are Albanians. (Arbnorgashi (talk) 20:06, 5 March 2013 (UTC))

Yes, some of the content Arbnor has added is unrelated and also part of the content in the version that is being blindly reverted to is irrelevant. That being said, please don't involve my edits in the blanking that has been going on these past weeks. They're both sourced and relevant to this article something that can't be said about the reverted versions.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 20:25, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Do not remove template. This is POv as hell, with complete removal of 500 years of Serbian history on Kosovo. I will copyedit entire article, section by section. --WhiteWriter^speaks 20:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Care to explain those 500 years with sources? Kosovo came under Serbian rule/migrations in the late 12th/early 13th century and it collapsed in the mid 15th century. Of course in that era there were shifts like the fact that much of western Kosovo was under the Dukagjini family or the existence of semi-independent citiies under merchants from Ragusa or Albanian urban rulers.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 20:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Let's not talk in vain... I will edit section by section, and if you (or anyone) find any problem, talk page is actually quite useful thing to solve anything. But it cannot stay like this. --WhiteWriter^speaks 20:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Well after the Battle of Kosovo, Ottomans invaded the Albanian and now day Kosovo territories. And we all know, this resultet with the establishment of the Kosovo Vilayet. If you are more eager to know about the Kosovo Vilayet, then check the wikipedia article...I dont agree that there is a 500 years old history of Serbia in Kosovo. I would say there are two periods, and each of them lastet maybe for 100 years, and not to forget that in the second period that was in 20th Century, Kosovo was a autonom part of Yugoslavia. The rest of the story with the WAR and the Indipendence, I bet You know too!!! And if you think that information is needed, than add it there, but let it be about Kosovo, and it must have the right references and citations. (Arbnorgashi (talk) 20:47, 5 March 2013 (UTC))

Problematic entries in the "Greater Albanian"-revision:

• Periodization in "Illyrian territories": is this even relevant? Does it refer to Illyrian territories as per cultural affiliation? Note that "Dardania" was never located in Kosovo before 87BC, and that the region was inhabited by Thracians or Thracians with Illyrian influence.
• Establishment of Dardanian Kingdom: See above.
• Dardanian rulers: See above.
• Great Illyrian Revolt: not fought in the territory of Kosovo.
• Normans in "Albanian territory": was the region considered "Albanian" at the time? No.
• Crusade: Is it explicitly said that the armies marched through Kosovo? No. See above also.
• Arbanon: Arbanon had no territory in Kosovo.
• Arbanon rulers: See above.
• Kingdom of Albania: Albania had no territory in Kosovo.
• Skanderbeg: No relation to Kosovo. see above.
• Births of Albanian "nationals" (with no relation to Kosovo): see above.

I could go on, you get the point. Now it is obvious that the revision is Albanian POV, please compare the two revisions (go through them carefully), and you will see that it is an obvious attempt at erasing Serbian history of Kosovo. Instead of adding relevant entries to the stable version, new editors of the so called "Wiki Academy Kosovo" (funded by the Republic of Kosovo) resorts to simply erasing the "Serbian entries". Antidiskriminator has already said the obvious. This is outrageous...--Zoupan 20:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

black sea Slavs

@Aigest, will you please explain your statement about: "references to black sea Slavs"?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:03, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Im talking here, cuz Im still new in Wikipedia, and I have to get used to it LOL, still, if you're editing it, you have to take more information from the other Timeline, the migrations, the kosovar fighters, etc. U use to say that Eurisarukovci was Nationalist, but to say the truth you're the one being so. You are trying to change a long history of Kosovo people, turning us all to serbs... Think about it, and recognize that this thing isnt right!!! :D :D (Arbnorgashi (talk) 23:38, 6 March 2013 (UTC))

Well, your proposed version also has some parts that aren't directly related to Kosovo. On the other hand,

*Slavs are mentioned in the Balkans during Justinian I rule (527–565), when eventually up to 100,000 Slavs raided Thessalonica.

• 1392: The Ottomans capture Skopje. Vuk Branković, remembered in epic tradition as a traitor who slipped away from the Battle of Kosovo, was forced to become their vassal. Stefan Lazarević followed suit.
• 1396: The Battle of Nicopolis in 1396, widely regarded as the last large-scale crusade of the Middle Ages, failed to stop the advance of the victorious Ottomans

among others also have nothing to do with Kosovo. Btw would you all please not remove my edits in every revert? They have nothing to do with the two contested versions and are relevant[3].--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 23:20, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

1392, Brankovic realm (including Kosovo) is under Ottoman vassalage. @Aigest, I'm also interested in your statement.--Zoupan 01:22, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Read Florin Curta "The making of Slavs" on 527-565 events Aigest (talk) 14:43, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

@Aigest: You removed referenced text and inserted version which you yourself described as "unrelated" because of the "references to black sea Slavs". Will you plese be so kind to explain where did you find those references?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:28, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism

It seems that number of editors are hoping for certain financial gain from this article. This is case of vandalism and propaganda. I'm changing the article back to its proper form, removing edits that violate Wikipedia rules. Please, don't remove referenced content and content that is corresponding to other Wikipedia articles anymore. Perunova straža (talk) 22:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Did you read the two articles ?? (Arbnorgashi (talk) 23:07, 10 March 2013 (UTC))

Yes, I did. I also read that prizes at the amount of 10,000 EUR will be given to the team contributors of articles that contain most propaganda. If you have problem with the stable version of the article first discuss it in Talk page, and then after consensus is made edit the thing that you think needs editing. You, and everybody else, can't simply erase well referenced article and replace it with another that violates Wikipedia policy. Perunova straža (talk) 07:14, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

It'd be prudent not to go on with comments about propaganda, so please stick to WP:NPA.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 09:59, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I advise you to read WP:NPA, before implying that I've made a PA. Perunova straža (talk) 12:06, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I still don't understand why are so eager writing about Timeline of Kosovo History, you're not even from Kosovo, the Information you added it mostly has nothing to do with Kosovo. Exept some infomation in the beggining and the dates of the buildings being built (And that has nothing to do with History)... I just don't understand that, and you also open a talk about Vandalism. HAHA... I just have to laugh about that!!! @zjarrirrethues, could you write me in my personal e-mail ?! I think you can find it in my preferences or somewhere, if not then I'll write it here!! Arbnorgashi (talk) 15:15, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I really don't know what are you talking about, I've simply reverted article to the last stable version. Perunova straža (talk) 21:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Please stop with the propaganda comments. That is not true on any level at all. Which organization in their right mind would offer 10,000 EUR to disgrace a wiki article?

How can you say that was a stable version, Can't you see, it writes on top of it, it needs a clean up, improvement and stuff like that!! -4- 46.19.230.16 (talk) 23:16, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

It's clear that new changes are just a project of government of Kosovo:

The project is organized within the Digital Diplomacy Strategy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kosovo. This national event offers rewards for the most well written and researched articles and submitted photographs. All awards will be determined by a jury. Team contributors of best articles or photos that fulfill professional and qualitative criteria and remain as integrated part of Wikipedia will be awarded with prizes at the amount of 10,000 EUR.

http://wikiacademykosovo.org/ Perunova straža (talk) 08:11, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

In what level did that portray propaganda? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eurisarukovci (talk • contribs) 11:33, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Please Add On!

Please add on what you think needs to be added to this version of the timeline. It is more organized, has a lot more space for improvement and we could really contribute to the rich history of Kosovo if we would just work together. Also, I think that information on when and where buildings were built is not relevant to a country timeline. Let's stop this "edit war" and start contributing to making Kosovo's history recognized. I agree that some of the information that relates more to Albania and Serbia should be removed so let's please try to work together and stop doing and undoing versions. I would hope that we're all civilized adults here. Eurisarukovci (talk) 21:39, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Let's work together from the stable version, as has already been said. I think that the monuments of Kosovo must be on the list, because the region has a very rich history of ecclesiastical and Islamic architecture. Dont forget that it was you who started unanimously "rewriting" the article without consulting with the known editors...--Zoupan 09:27, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm thinking we should merge the two articles together. I will be working on that if everyone agrees?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Eurisarukovci (talk • contribs) 11:36, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Rather, what do you want to add? Honestly, I would only add some of your entries of the 20th and 21st century, minus the births. Going through the data of the preceding time, it is too obviously unrelated (like history of Central Albania, publication of Albanian-language books, etc). Again, do not act without concensus.--Zoupan 11:59, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

In a more general sense, I think that some consolidation would be helpful. Lots of different articles on Kosovo tend to retell part of its history, so we get lots of overlapping content which is even harder to improve. bobrayner (talk) 12:48, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Just added massive information, without deleting anything, in a way I merged the two timelines...Hope you're pleased, please don't delete it, if you think something must be changed than talk about it, we can discuse about it!! Arbnorgashi (talk) 15:23, 13 March 2013 (UTC) I also added some pictures from wiki commons Arbnorgashi (talk) 21:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Stop ignoring the opinion of other editors. Please read above discussion. Massive changes should be first discussed then added. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:47, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

What editors? You said that information to be added was need, so thats what i Did...Every date that I added has references. Thank you :D Arbnorgashi (talk) 02:12, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I think that changes should be first discussed on talk page. That way, at least some sort of consensus could be made. For instance, we can talk about entries for years 1096, 1107 and 1108. What Albanian territory is in question, where it is situated and exactly how does it connects Normans from southern Italy to the Mediterranean Sea? Perunova straža (talk) 07:52, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Removed: * 1190 ca – The first Illyrian state, the Principality of Arbanon was established (also known as “Arbëria”) by the Albanoi (List of ancient tribes in Illyria) tribe. This middle age population is known as the closest ancestors to modern Albanian and Kosovar population. It's neither first Illyrian state, as one see even from this article, nor it was established by the Albanoi, nor it was a proper state. Let's not make this article a place to dump fringe theories and pseudoscience. Perunova straža (talk) 08:41, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

You should remove the Siege of Belgrade too :D. In my opininon that has nothing to do with the History of Kosova :D 46.99.47.208 (talk) 11:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Removed the points about Smederevo, Despotovac, Varna and Nis.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 13:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Point by point

I've just realised that additional content has been added - content that should've been discussed first. In my opinion editors showed take better care when adding content that might be challenged. Let us review these entries:

VI – II (millennium) – Neolithic age in Illyrian territories

II (millennium) – Bronze age in Illyrian territories

X (century) – The beginning of the Iron Age

These entries have several issues. First, the provided reference is for period of IV century BC, not for the time period in question, so these entries are basically unreferenced. Second, we can trace Illyrians, per historical academic community, to about X century BC, in most optimistic and very stretched case. Thus, first two entries are senseless. Third, beginning of the Iron Age varies on the region, so some proper reference, that clearly shows that Iron Age in Kosovo and Metohija started in X century would be appreciated. I'll leave this be, for now. However, if something doesn't change within next couple of days I'll remove said entries. Perunova straža (talk) 13:06, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

• By the end of the second millenium before our era the Illyrians crossed the Adriatic and conquered the present Italian province of Apulia. One of their tribes inhabited the province of Marca.
• In the second millenium B.C. an Illyrian tribe known as the Dardanians inhabited what is today Kosovo, Macedonia and southern Serbia, a region which came to be known as Dardania.

Quotes from Nebojs̆a Tomas̆ević and Zvane Črnja --— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 13:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

@perunova straza, I promise you, if you delete the referenced Infomation about Neolithic, Bronze and Iron age, I'll make sure to delete most of the information that you added and that has nothing to do with Kosovo. And its a historical fact that dardanians were an illyrian tribe, even though they were more independent. Thank you, and dont delete it. About the references I'm going to rewrite then, i think a mistake sliped during the work :D Arbnorgashi (talk) 14:34, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Albania%3A+from+Illyria+to+today.-a0258916716 Arbnorgashi (talk) 14:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Arbnorgashi, be so kind to read WP:NPA, adn also do refrain from threatening other editors. FYI, I've made just one entry to the article, and that was adding a reference, the rest was returning the article in stable version. Perunova straža (talk) 20:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

ZjarriRrethues, do you notice that the sources you've given don't mention Bronze Age, Iron Age, Neolithic Age? Also, you are deleting entries that were in the stable version of the article, without previous discussion in the talk page. Please, stop vandalizing the article. Perunova straža (talk) 20:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I didnt want to make it personal. Still you should check that link. But I have to say, lots of your information have to be deleted, starting with the buildings and countinuing with some ottoman wars, serbian wars etc. Arbnorgashi (talk) 22:31, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Insisting to delete events related to Kosovo being part of Serbia or Ottoman Empire and in the same time struggling to add events important for Albanians although many of them are unrelated to Kosovo is disruptive. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:07, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Gjakova/Yakova

I must say that I am baffled by recent edits over Gjakova/Yakova. It goes something like this:

1. I changed the name from Yakova to Gjakova, citing a reliable English-language source which calls it Gjakova during the Ottoman period.
2. Evlekis makes a bizarre complaint on my talkpage - claiming that "The Ottomans did not lay claim to the Kosovo vilayet" - and concludes that "To thks end, Gjakova was never commonly used in English secondary sources". Which is not true. I'd cited a secondary source calling it Gjakova.
3. Evlekis undid my edit with "It was Yakova, Ottoman Empire, recognised as being this entity by whole world so keep opinions to yourself. Besides, it has at no time in English been called 'Gjakova')". The first part of that is irrelevant; the second part is untrue.
4. Evlekis then added the best source he could find on google which supported his preferred spelling; the website of a Korean boarding school.
5. I change the name back to Gjakova, because that's what the reliable source says.
6. Evlekis complains "You are trolling Bobrayner, doing nothing constructive, you know Gjakova is exclusively the Albanian name and not the local name per historical accuracy)" whilst changing the name of a different town (from "Ferizaj" to "Ferizovik"). I've never touched that, although I'm beginning to think I should open a few history books and check any other placenames that Evlekis has changed.
7. Evlekis changes Gjakova back to Yakova. That line still cites an English-language reliable source which, in reality, calls the town "Gjakova" throughout the Ottoman period.
8. Evlekis suggests on my talkpage that the 1911 Britannica calls it "Yakova" then complains about how old my source is, having been published in 1999. In reality, it was published in 2002. (In another bizarre episode, Evlekis accuses me of citing two Albanian sources, and then cites WP:AT even though neither Yakova nor Gjakova is the article title). Evlekis also says "I have checked your sources and they fail to substantiate your claim" which is another outright lie; the reliable source says Gjakova.
9. Evlekis, if you'd actually like to include the Ottoman names for places during the Ottoman era, I could go along with that. You will first have to lean how to read and write them, unless you expect me to do that work for you. However, I'm reluctant to do so much work to humour somebody who keeps on making stuff up.

Anyway. The end result: I've added a reliable source. Evlekis has said lots of angry stuff, some of which is false, some misrepresents sources, and some is just laughably irrelevant. And Evlekis' preferred version simply doesn't match what the reliable source says. I've reverted once in an attempt to bring the content back in line with the source, but Evlekis will always be willing to hit revert again. Why does this happen every day? It's very tiresome and's a net negative for the encyclopædia. bobrayner (talk) 19:57, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. We observe historical accuracy here and names used in sources presented for content are a different matter to Wikipedia:Naming Conventions. Note however that there are also sources which refer to settlement names correctly as you will see here (Ipek + Yakova) [4]. Ferizovik was the correct name for the preiod in question. Naturally if we sidestep historical accuracy there is no point mentioning Dardania as this is not a modern entity. Please note however that the alternatives to historical accuracy are to use titles per WP:AT otherwise you can scoop secondary sources which refer to Kumanovo as Kumanova, or Preševo as Presheva. Use the sources for the content, leave the naming policy in accordance with conventions. Many thanks. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 20:22, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

@Bobrayner

• Your comment deals more with Evlekis than with real issue, referring to this dispute as "spelling" dispute (which is not true), to his position as "Evlekis' preferred version" which "doesn't match what the reliable source says" (which is also untrue - George Gawrych (26 December 2006). The Crescent and the Eagle: Ottoman Rule, Islam and the Albanians, 1874-1913. I.B.Tauris. p. 68. ISBN 978-1-84511-287-5. Retrieved 7 April 2013. The fall of Yakova on 5 May 1881)
• In case of dispute you should not edit war or make personal remarks about other editors. Someone who don't AGF could see this as some kind of retaliation because Evlekis reported you and his report resulted with warning for you.
• I think that per WP:COMMONNAME this toponym should be referred to as Đakovica.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:57, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

• I am merely trying to respond to a series of non sequiteurs and various claims that, an uninvolved editor might charitably say, contradict (or cannot be reconciled with) what I have done or what sources say. It is unfortunate that they all come from the same editor; I've no interest in ad hominem. It's just frustrating that the name of one town in an obscure history article generates so much bluster and deception. If reliable sources prefer Đakovica for that period, I'm happy to go along with Đakovica; if reliable sources say Gjakova, then the article should say Gjakova. bobrayner (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Fine answer but I know trolling when I smell it. You have provided a political response using an excuse of a theory "what the sources say" which you know is now rotten to its roots. You are looking for excuses to use Albanian over all else and are even doing this at the expense of historical accuracy which forms the basis for consensus. Very interesting how your interest starts and ends with 'Gjakova' yet you happily leave this[5] version of an equivalent principle when the name making way for historically correct form is the Serbian AND common English name. If this is not POV-pushing, you are keeping your good faith very well hidden. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 23:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

• Yakova for Ottoman period.[6], [7], Look closely and you'll even see Ferizovik, [8], [9], the list of reliable references to Yakova in English is endless.
• Đakovica or Djakovica. Take note that this refers to Kosova which was TURKISH name, [10], [11], [12]. All examples refer to the Ottoman period. There are sources for everything if you know where to look and we have sources for all three names of the settlement. Yakova? Historical accuracy. Đakovica? Article title, common English. Gjakova? You tell me. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 23:52, 7 April 2013 (UTC)