Itsonlymark

Serbia

Answering to your edit summary "but how is this a NPOV if you only mention that Serbia condemns and does not recognise Kosovo? What about the countries that have formally accepted? Does this not matter?", of course they matter. That is why the article must be written to reflect a border that has two de jure situations. By removing the Serbian position, you are destroying the neutrality of the first paragraph. It must present the tow situations in order to conform with WP:NPOV, regardless of how many countries have already recognized Kosovo's independence. Regards, Húsönd 01:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Serbia- again

I fully agree with the comment above. The intro must reflect the de jure position- by which I mean not only Serbian POV- (which has basis in int.law)- but also the UN's as well as other international organizations. It's fine with me that the UK recognizes Kosovo- but that's their own bileteral relations which do not reflect international position (nor its law) at all. As I previously said, 33 out of 192 member states of the UN support the idea (meaning that 159 members do not!) Hypotethically, if Serbia and 32 other states recognized Northern Ireland as an independent state and I (as a Serb) deleted the paragraph on Wiki concerning UK's borders (in this case with Ireland), would it be justified???! Would we be having this debate? I'm asking you politely to stop sacking the Serbia article and be more constructive (maybe, switch to Kosovo article)>? Regards, NeroN_BG

Possibly unfree File:BOClogo1.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BOClogo1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Skier Dude (talk 02:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)