Template talk:Kosovan elections


WikiProject Elections and Referendums (Rated Template-class)
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Flag or map


This template, as well as linking to elections held by the "independent" regime currently running most of Kosovo, also links to elections held before the declaration of independence when Kosovo was under international administration. This implies that there is legal continuity between the two administrations, when this is disputed. I think the map should be used on the template instead of the flag or the template should be split.--Ptolion (talk) 20:00, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I Agree . This template is for whole of Kosovo, not just self proclaimed republic. Also, removed by this, this and this. Tadija (talk) 20:03, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
I disagree. This template is for the Republic of Kosovo. Nor Serbia recognizes its elected leaders, neither Kosovo's elected leaders recognize Serbia. Just wait the ICJ decision. Then I'll happily remove all srpski names out of Kosovo articles. --Muzakaj (talk) 20:45, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
That's the point, it's not for the ROK, most of the elections it links to were held by UNMIK. If independence was undisputed, then there would be no problem. Since, however, even you admit that there is an ICJ case pending and therefore there is a dispute, then the most neutral option is to support neither view.--Ptolion (talk) 21:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
These are elections and politics of the ROK or leading to the ROK. No relation to Kosovo as a province of Serbia.--Muzakaj (talk) 21:44, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
But UNMIK was international administration of Kosovo as a province of Serbia.--Ptolion (talk) 21:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Did Serbia recognize any political activities? NO. Serbia actually declared Agim Ceku as a war criminal.--Muzakaj (talk) 21:54, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
True, but this isn't about Serbia. I don't know how you understand it, but the way I see it, including the ROK flag is endorsing the pro-independence point of view. Including no flag is endorsing neither point of view, it just means that the template is listing elections that have happened on the territory of Kosovo under any administration.--Ptolion (talk) 21:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
I'll tell you how I see it. Albania had elections under Ismail Qemal era, monarchy, fascism, and even party elections under communism, and of course under pluralism. In the sq.wikipedia we use the modern Albanian flag instead of the older variants to represent these political eras. Same applies here. --Muzakaj (talk) 22:05, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
You're right. However, as I said above, "if independence were undisputed, then there would be no problem". No one is disputing Albania as the successor state to communist Albania or Kingdoms of Albania etc, Kosovan independence is disputed and UNMIK still legally exists. You can't draw parallels between Albania, or any other internationally recognised state, and Kosovo.--Ptolion (talk) 22:09, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
It doesn't have the same significance as in 2002-2006. I think that we should wait, in about month we'll have the ICJ decision, and then let's take action. --Muzakaj (talk) 22:15, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't think the ICJ decision will make any difference since it is unenforceable. Serbia just brought the case to score political points. I have a suggestion though, how about including both the UN flag (for UNMIK) and the ROK flag. That way we avoid having to discuss which of the two held the elections.--Ptolion (talk) 22:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Seems reasonable enough. Sure. --Muzakaj (talk) 22:23, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Or, we can just remove it, as we did in all other Kosovo related articles. UN flag (for UNMIK) is not used here any more in this situations, It we place NEUTRAL green kosovo shape, that is the best. No flag while it is disputed. Also, this little flag does not deserve all our attention here. Tadija (talk) 22:38, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
We agree just fine with Ptolion and we reached a consensus.--Muzakaj (talk) 22:40, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
UN flag added, finally worked out how to do it with it linking to UNMIK. Muzakaj, it's not really a consensus until Tadija agrees as well. Tadija, can you at least live with this until a final solution is worked out? I think it would be a good idea to try to resurrect WP:MOSKOS, however that would probably require involving a lot of administrators, so it will take a long time.--Ptolion (talk) 22:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Consensus is not reached if all involving parties are not agreed. We can also put Serbian flag, or Albanian also... But this dual flag template in never used here before?! I will gladly remove all flags, so in a few days, and with a few more editors here, we will know what to do. And for the WP:MOSKOS, dont worry, i will resurrect it my self if none else will. Tadija (talk) 22:47, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Think that the best is just to remove all flags. We don't need those while template is disputed. Tadija (talk) 22:48, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
We agree fine with Ptolion, just keep on discussing otherwise don't do anything. --Muzakaj (talk) 22:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
I must agree also. And this template is used in only 7 places, we dont need flags for those... I'll remove it. Tadija (talk) 22:48, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
on what grounds? Remove it and I'll report you, as I should have done already. --Muzakaj (talk) 22:53, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

-reset indenting- Tadija, I agree that it would be best with no flags, or just the neutral map flag. However, most users are familiar to seeing such templates with the flag of the administration that held the elections, so even if we agree here on using no flags, tomorrow or next week someone not very familiar with the Kosovo situation will add the ROK flag. True, the two-flag approach is unique, however so is Kosovo's situation. UNMIK still exists, on paper, even the Serbian government agrees that, and UNMIK was formed on the understanding that Kosovo is a province of Serbia. As a result, the template is incorporating both points of view by using both flags. Anyway, I see this measure a temporary until a final wiki-wide consensus can be worked out (in MOSKOS or elsewhere).--Ptolion (talk) 23:04, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree, Ptolion. All best, Tadija (talk) 23:15, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Just play along Tadija, it's much better that way. Case resolved...for now. --Muzakaj (talk) 23:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Muzakaj is blocked indef as a sock of highly disruptive user User:Sarandioti. All his edits should be undone. Tadija (talk) 14:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
If you want to restore the map version and see if it holds, I won't object. If it doesn't though, we may have to return to the two-flag version.--Ptolion (talk) 14:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Ptolion, it looks like it will be separation of Kosovo and Republic of Kosovo on wiki. This template may be out of function when that happen, as main idea is that Kosovo is not equal to Republic of Kosovo, so those two must be separated. Let it stay for now. All best, Tadija (talk) 14:50, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
I know there has been talk of that, but I doubt it will happen. I also think it may be a bad idea because the ROK article will be fertile ground for pov-pushing to make it look more "statelike" with argument that that's how it's done at Abkhazia, Northern Cyprus etc. The best thing to do with Kosovo articles imo is to do what is done at the main Kosovo article, use more than one infobox and more than one set of insignia.--Ptolion (talk) 14:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Yup, you are right about that also... We will see, i dont know what will happen. Anyway, we will leave this for now... All best, Ptolion. Tadija (talk) 19:20, 17 December 2009 (UTC)