Talk:International recognition of Kosovo/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Um what?

I appreciate that editors can sometimes be enthuastic, but remember we are an encylopaedia. We are supposed to report things accurately and can afford to wait since there is no deadline. As such, we should NOT be saying that countries have recognised Kosovo when the articles we are using specifically say the countries have NOT yet recognised Kosov. Recognition is a very formal process and it can't just happen on a whim. As it stands, After removing countries which were just reported as likely to recognise Kosov, I was left with 2 countries which we at least had official statements where it was stated they were going to recognise Kosovo. Not wanting to leave an empty list, I changed the header to 'countries that are expected to recognise'. This is far from ideal, but seems the best solution. IMHO, the best bet would have been to wait until we actually had something to add to the list before creating it, but perhaps that's just me... Nil Einne (talk) 19:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

You're absolutely correct, we should wait. How about a section for countries expected to recognize Kosovo, to dissuade other editors from inserting unofficial recognitions? --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I personally would prefer to wait, at least until Monday - Tuesday since things should be a lot clearer after that but I won't remove anything which is accurate and sourced. (Actually I've been spending too much time on Wikipedia recently so I probably won't be removing anything) Nil Einne (talk) 19:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

May be useful

Not a reliable source but I came across this [1] Nil Einne (talk) 19:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. I'll plug "kosovo+countryname" into Google News for a few of those and see if I can find reliable sources for any of them. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

China

what about china? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.15.131.253 (talk) 04:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Bosnia

I have removed Bosnia from the list as there two articles give contradictory statements. This article says they will not recognise soon, while this says they will recognise Kosovo. Davewild (talk) 20:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Bosnia can not recognize because Serb Republic has Veto in presidency. So they can not accept independence because the serb leaders in Bosnia said they would never do so.

Today Israel Comfirmed they will not recognize Kosovo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.216.166.187 (talk) 11:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Taiwan

Taiwan has also recognized Kosovo. Should this be included? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

OF COURSE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.98.223.232 (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

• I cannot find any reference that it has recognised Kosovo. This just says they have congratulated Kosovo. If they do recognise Kosovo then I think they should be included in the list. Davewild (talk) 20:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Its likely they would like to recognize, given their similar situation with China. However Taiwan has a long history of non-official political stances. Find a definite source if one ever materializes --Lemmey (talk) 20:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Please make sure the ROC (Taiwan) is in only one section. It cannot be a will country and a has country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.122.240 (talk) 16:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I think only UN recognized nation should included in the list, otherwise Northern Cyprus, Principality of Sealand can. Matthew_hk tc 17:17, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

And for my Chinese ability, it is not a formal one. Matthew_hk tc 17:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

It use 恭賀 congratulates and in the news section reported the "independence", but seems non of the proper words for formal recognization. Or it already cause war between GMD and Democratic Progressive Party. Matthew_hk tc 17:48, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Taiwan is a delicate problem. The country was one of the first to recognize Kosovo, but the question is whether Kosovo will ever recognize Taiwan.... --Camptown (talk) 17:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Another argument, diplomatic relaion need both side, but Kosovo recognize Taiwan may not a dream due to trade and PRC reaction. Matthew_hk tc 18:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

If we consider the long-lasting recognition duel between the mainland and the island of Taiwan, it is not a surprise for me to see Taiwan's fast recognition of Kosovo. The government of Taiwan itself hopelessly needs some power in the world arena in order to survive. I can say that Kosovo is a valuable card for Taiwan, at least it is more publicly known than the little countries which Taiwan is recognized in. The world is divided into two camps on the Kosovo issue, just like it used to do back in the good old days of the 20th century. Deliogul (talk) 23:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The Kosovo government has officially recognized [2] (The website is a government website it can be accessed through www.ks-gov.net/portal/eng.htm) Taiwan's recognition of Kosovo [3] (Official press release stating 'Recognition' not just 'Congratulations') which basically puts it on par with all the other countries that have recognized Kosovo in the world. Mods please change status accordingly. Thanks! Vinniereno (talk) 04:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Kosova Thanks You just added "this is not a Kosovar Government site" to their page in red letters. And in the HTML comments, I found this:

We have received many many different e-mails from both Taiwan and China about the recognition of Kosova, and Taiwan's position on this. We value all your e-mails. Please understand that this website is created to thank all the countries that are recognizing Kosovo as an Independent State. We are not in a position to take a side about the Taiwan issue especially at this critical time. We have decided to list only countries that are members of United Nations. Thank you for your understanding! We Thank Everyone for their support.

F (talk) 11:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

IRELAND

At TV said that Ireland recognised the first Kosovo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.98.223.232 (talk) 20:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Could we have a concrete reference to look at? We can't really use TV as a source. —Kurykh 20:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Its Sunday. I don't know a gov't in the world that works on Sunday. (except maybe the Vatican). The TV probably misstated recognize for will recognize.--Lemmey (talk) 20:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget the Kosovo gov't, hence all of this. :) —Kurykh 20:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Ireland has NOT yet recognised Kosovan independence. It is expected to do so but no official recognition has yet been given. MacTire 16:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Section headings

Please stop dividing the opposition category into "stated" and "reluctant". It's impossible to demonstrate reluctance, and the BBC and Xinhua sources actually say "oppose" for the countries they cite. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 20:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Solution for reluctant. Nations that are expected to recognize in under a week should be expected. Nations that have no official stance (Czech Republic) go in the Other section. Nations that are expected to recognize after a longer period (Japan) go in the Other section. --Lemmey (talk) 20:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

British English

As this is a European subject, it should be in British English, meaning all the "recognize"s should be "recognise". Does anyone object? J Milburn (talk) 21:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

There, done. J Milburn (talk) 21:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with totally, you should change it. Pathfinder2006 (talk) 21:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Wait a minute — "Recognize" is the spelling of the OED. It is something of a misconception that the -ize suffix is an Americanization. Of course a lot of British publication now use the ise ending… Evil Monkey - Hello 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Take that redcoat. Oh beg your pardon, what I meant to say was Burn--Lemmey (talk) 21:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Merriam Webster agree with recognise. The Free Dictionary lists the spelling, but doesn't mention it being British/American. J Milburn (talk) 21:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

After reading around a little, I see both are acceptable, but -ise is in much wider use in Britain, meaning that it makes sense to use that in this article. J Milburn (talk) 21:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Please read the ise VS ize wiki entry - "ize" is not an americanism, and is the preferred spelling of OED. Changing a correct spelling to another correct spelling seems, uh, sub-optimal. I'm not going to revert it back because that'd be even more sub-optimal. But please please please, if someone does revert please leave it. Dan Beale-Cocks 11:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:ENGVAR says it doesn't really matter. But I agree that we should not edit war on which one to use - that would be stupid. BalkanFever 11:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Sweden

From what I can tell, the Swedish constitution makes no reference to UN approval being necessary before recognition. The Tom (talk) 21:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, claiming that that is why they are not recognising constitutes original research. Such comments should be reverted. J Milburn (talk) 21:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Firs Wave, Second Wave

This is what the analysts are discussing all day on the news in Serbia and Macedonia. Albania, Austria and Irland are to be in the fist wave, The rese of EU and US in the second wave... i think that since the article is List of countiries that have recognised Kosovo, it is important to state that NO COUNTRIES have done it officialy. And since wikipedia is not an oracle, there can not be a section with ... will recognize —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.125.236.123 (talk) 22:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

BH

Someone should find a source I can't. The Presidency has just concluded its decision and declared it to the public. The Bosniac and Croat representatives have agreed to not recognize independence of Kosovo without approval of the Serb representative. In return, the Serb representative has guaranteed the territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina and reaffirmed the country's sovereignty, denouncing possibilities of separatism. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Query

Why has the first two sections of the article have the same name? Speedboy Salesman (talk) 22:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The article is developing very quickly. That problem appears to be dealt with now. J Milburn (talk) 22:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Norway

According to one of the biggest Norwegian newspapers, Aftenposten, Norway will not decide what to do before they have seen what other states will do, both in the EU and NATO. Norway will also consult their Nordic nabours, according to the Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jonas Gahr Støre. Erik2sen (talk) 22:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud/Press-Contacts/News/2008/kosovo3.html?id=501360 Norway has recognised the REpublic of Kosovo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.70.66.34 (talk) 16:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Norway has not recognized Kosovo yet. They will do it, they have decided in principle. But the formal decision has not been made yet. So Norway shouldn't be moved to the states that had made formal decision. You can read that at the bottom of the press release.--Trigor (talk) 17:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Norway is planning to recognize Republic of Kosova here is my source: http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=24715

Abstract: "Norway to recognise Kosovo as an independent state

“I can announce today that Norway is going to recognise Kosovo as an independent state. There are several reasons why we have arrived at this conclusion,” says Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre.

“Unfortunately, there is no reason to believe that further negotiations would lead to a mutually agreed solution to the status issue. At the same time, the status quo is no longer viable. There is a need to clarify Kosovo’s future status so that it can continue its economic and political development. In the current situation, it is important that the members of the international community as far as possible take a common position. This in itself would contribute to clarity and stability. A large number of European countries, including other Nordic countries, intend to recognise Kosovo. Given the situation, we feel it is appropriate to signal that Norway will do so as well,” says Mr Støre."

Also here is a link from "Norway Post" http://www.norwaypost.no/cgi-bin/norwaypost/imaker?id=131289 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.253.128 (talk) 02:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Indonesia

they haven't said any single world, have they?. the source was from a year ago, and it's likely they changed their mind. Maybe you should includes it to the other states.--w_tanoto (talk) 22:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I have moved Indonesia from countries not recognising to the other states, per this: http://www.antara.co.id/en/arc/2008/2/18/ri-yet-to-recognize-kosovo-independence/ --w_tanoto (talk) 17:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

There's "recognition", and then there's Recognition.

Diplomatic recognition is not carried out by prime ministers talking into microphones, or even by foreign affairs ministries issuing press releases. It is an international legal process, built on centuries of protocol, that requires the formal transmission of a diplomatic note.

Yes, Australia, Ireland and a few other states have been pretty explicit about their intent to recognize. But it is not one and the same as recognition. It will happen, but hasn't happened yet, so be patient. The Tom (talk) 23:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems that some people don't understand you.

They have, they plan, they have, they plan...... Call that an edition war in France :( Kormin (talk) 23:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, sorry, but the Wikipedia I am aware of works on sources, and our sources seem to say they recognise... J Milburn (talk) 23:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Ireland will recognize Kosovo. will. Future tense. The Tom (talk) 23:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Alright, sorry, I was being too snappy. Apologies to anyone who I offended, I agree this works better, but I just really don't want to say 'will recognise' when they already have. J Milburn (talk) 23:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I imagine there'll be followup news stories (there were when Montengro went through the process), or alternately the Kosovan foreign ministry will make much of it each time they get a note. Montenegro actually had a web page where they displayed scanned copies of them. The Tom (talk) 23:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The Australian Prime Minister said Australia "would offer official diplomatic recognition in the near future ... would extend recognition at the earliest opportunity".[4] 203.7.140.3 (talk) 23:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Australia has formally recognized Kosovo - [5]. I updated the article accordingly. --Ubardak (talk) 05:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Map

A map would look good on this page. Any offers? 87.114.129.209 (talk) 23:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Too many changes in the next 48 hours. Give it a week. --Lemmey (talk) 23:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree that a map would be a brilliant idea, but, sadly, it would change far, far too quickly. J Milburn (talk) 23:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I uploaded one. (Recognition of Kosovo.png) 1.618033989 (talk) 01:17, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

File:Kosovo recognition.svg

Even though I know it will probably change by the hour, I threw together this quick map, though it needs to be modified since it does not have Kosovo as separate, nor highlight Serbia. Evil Monkey - Hello 02:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Map has been deleted since the SVG world maps lacks lots of island nations. Evil Monkey - Hello 20:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I've been working on a map, but with contradicting edits every 2 minutes, it's impossible to keep one up to date at all times. A Max J (talk) 16:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Merge

I see no reason to have both this article and Foreign relations of Kosovo. There is not enough content to justify them to be separate. For example Foreign relations of Montenegro also includes the countries that recognize it. J Milburn, that was extremely rude to make that comment and remove the tag citing that there are more important issues. Reywas92^Talk 23:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

This is linked very prominently on the main page, and is attracting a lot of traffic. I am not opposed to the idea of discussing a merge, I am just opposed to the hideous tag. Apologies if I caused any offense, that's the second aggressive comment I have made tonight... J Milburn (talk) 23:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Not here Discussion has already started at Talk:Foreign relations of Kosovo#Merge. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 23:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Ummm isn't that discussion for that other thingy there? NikoSilver 00:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with WP:RUDE. If a move is made I think the list of non-recogniZing nations it as important as the recogniZing ones. --Lemmey (talk) 23:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome to use American spelling on the talk page, there's no need to show off the fact that you are doing so... J Milburn (talk) 23:54, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Strong oppose. The declaration of independence just happened today, and the UN and EU are still debating the issue. I urge that you allow events to unfold first. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Strong support I'm sorry, but what's the connection between event unfolding and where we put them? To my knowledge there's no such article for any other country. I can also propose we can templatize the list, and include a copy to Foreign relations of Kosovo#States that have recognized the Republic of Kosovo to satisfy both sides. What says you? NikoSilver 00:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose merge The reactions associated with the independence declaration are sufficiently notable and verifiable to have a separate article. Superm401 - Talk 22:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment

Could we not have straw polls at two places at the same time? —Kurykh 00:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the other one for another thing? It says merge 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence with Foreign relations of Kosovo. Two different articles. Boy, we got three now! NikoSilver 01:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo Thanks You Webiste

www.kosovothanksyou.com say that the following countries recognize Kosovo:

Albania Argentina Australia Austria Belgium Bulgaria Canada Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Fiji Finland France Germany Greece Greenland Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Kuwait Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Macedonia, FYR Malaysia Malta Mauritania Monaco Montenegro Morocco Netherlands New Zealand Norway Pakistan Poland Portugal Saudi Arabia Slovak Republic Slovenia Sweden Switzerland Tonga Tunisia Turkey Tuvalu United Kingdom United States —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.202.255.18 (talk) 23:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

It also says that it is the Republic of KOSAVA not the Republic of KOSOVO

Even that (non-official) source says they will. NikoSilver 23:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The source is also unreliable. J Milburn (talk) 00:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Slovakia declarated that it will not recognize independet Kosovo. Czech Republic´s president Václav Klaus said that he disagree with indepedence of Kosovo - note that he is honor chairman of main coalition party ODS. Greece also declarated that it will not recognize independent Kosovo so your source is untrustable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.216.154.233 (talk) 12:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Poland is going to recognize Rep. of Kosova, my source is in Albanian but a reliable source which says "Prime minister of Poland Donald Tust has announced today that his government will recognize the independence of Kosova in the assmbly held on Tuesday. ETC ETC"

LINK = http://www.kosova.com/artikulli/44635 also LINK = http://www.poland.pl/news/article,Polish_PM_wants_to_recognize_Kosovos_independence_President_advises_caution,id,314969.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.206.162.123 (talk) 19:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Title

There's no such thing as "states that have recognised" (past tense). The title is WP:CRYSTALBALL at best. Also, the article needs to be merged with Foreign_relations_of_Kosovo#States_that_have_recognized_the_Republic_of_Kosovo (For the love of God, see the name of that section!). Now would be a good time. Main page can be always corrected. I'm saying this is not controversial. It's merely an editorial view (the first one IS though). NikoSilver 00:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Move or merge, take your pick. I added {{POV-title}} (which is double "hideous", but -sadly- very applicable. NikoSilver 00:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Just move it to a more appropriate title, I offer no objection. J Milburn (talk) 00:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I have no problem with changing the title as long as it's not needlessly complex or just plain dumb. But I do have an issue with the merge, which I've registered elsewhere. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Ditto. J Milburn (talk) 00:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

International recognition of Kosovo ? Can be neutral, no ?Kormin (talk) 00:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I removed the tag and fixed the double redirect from the main page (there may be more) and now, I'm going to bed. J Milburn (talk) 00:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually no. There can't be a neutral title as of yet. A neutral title should take consideration of what I say in my move summary,[6] and I can't see that happening (unless the title has the size of a train). NikoSilver 00:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

How about "List of countries by diplomatic status with Kosovo" or "List of international recognitions of Kosovo"? --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The former implies there are two kinds of statuses. The latter implies there is one (recognition). Both are POV, so the article should have simply not been created before the first recognition. BTW, the merge above is where we need the feedback mostly, because it solves it (ergo title becomes "Foreign relations of Kosovo", which is by far the most neutral). How about templatizing it as I said above? (reply above for continuity) NikoSilver 00:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Saudi Arabia reference

www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1971916/posts

Copypasted from a different article I've seen elsewhere that was also not a reliable source. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Security Council update

Times of India has a report on the meeting. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

European Union

Is the EU itself expected to take a stand on official recognition? Is the EU in the business of recognizing states? What sort of permission from its members would it need?

I'm asking because the article states that Croatia and the Czech Republic are waiting on the EU before making a decision. скоморохъ 01:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe the EU is having a meeting sometime today to discuss the Kosovo situation Nil Einne (talk) 06:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The EU is having a meeting today in order to reach a common stand on the status. But the recognition is in hands of each country (parliament/government, whatever the case). --Tone 10:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The EU works in the following way, effectively every country is free to make its own derisions, the EU can only speak out what has been agreed by all member states. If all EU members where intending to recognise Kosova then the EU would state its recognition, however it would also be up to each member state to recognise it formally. If even one EU country had flat out opposed any of this then the EU could not take any stance on the issue at all. What will happen (has happend), is that all EU countries will agree to support the effort to secure peace and rights and freedom in Kosova, but not all countries will agree to formally recognise it. 86.111.162.127 (talk) 13:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

On the subject of EU "recognition" (or whatever you want to call it), we seem to have a misread source. The article introduction (citing the Washington Post) talks about "formal EU recognition" in exchange for Kosovan acceptance of EULEX; the referenced Washington Post article, when I read it, only talks about "most of the European Union," as in most of its member states. The way this is represented in the Wiki article is NOT accurate at all (Spain, Romania, Cyprus, et al are strongly opposed to formal recognition, and no such recognition will go through without their consent) and I am editing that sentence to make it accurate. Vonschlesien (talk) 08:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

We have a policy for this...

Namely, WP:NOT#CBALL... Unless an article is written about the dates on which various countries recognized the independence of the US (for example), this list falls outside the guidelines... Tomer^talk 04:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

With a smidge of WP:IAR and a dash of Exemption 1 of the guideline you've cited, we've whipped up a valid article, one made even more valid tomorrow. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 05:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

i doub tit , Hemlock. this article si going to be a source of violent constroversy over the next few week and for the sake of peace it woul d be better perhaps if it was speedily-deleted. i have already been forced to go into an indept review because a lot of sources don't actually say what the article pretends like their are saying and it is getting on my nerves. Smith Jones (talk) 05:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Every article written on Kosovo from here until the end of time, from sports to cooking to education is "going to be a source of violent controversy," shall we then speedily-delete them all? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 06:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

you dont knowthat. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, you dont know what will happen after creating article until after creating the article and watching the flalout. Already after the creation of this article there is going rto be a special session of the UN to discuss it. After Russia fucks that up what yout do think is goingto happen? Major diplomatic fallout and possibly military prosturing to try and get Kosovo abck inside Serbia. people could die. which is why we have to report things during or after they happen instead of making wild speculation based on a handful of sources that some of them dont even match. Smith Jones (talk) 06:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

There is no grounds whatsoever to speedy delete this article, regardless of what you think is more "peaceful". If anyone does so, I will revert. Superm401 - Talk 12:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow. Just wow. Watch your POV and your mouth. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 06:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello pot, meet kettle. Tomer^talk 07:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I defy you to qualify your snide remark. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 07:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll wait for you to qualify yours. Better yet, work on improving something or contributing to constructive discussion. Thanks, Tomer^talk 07:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The biggest problem with this "article" is in its very name... there are no criteria outlined for inclusion, so everything is dumped into it, without regard to the unasked question "Expected ... by whom?" Then we find in the list a section for countries "planning" recognition, among which I've only taken the time to examine the sources cited for the USA, and found that neither of them indicates that the USA has made any statement regarding recognition... although 3 Democrats have said that they'd like to see the US recognize Kosovo. In fact, from what I can see, the only entity "expecting" the US to recognize Kosovo is Reuters! That certainly doesn't qualify for the bald assertion that the US is planning to recognize Kosovo. Tomer^talk 07:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Japan

[7] This should be taken into account in the Japan section. Contralya (talk) 06:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I had the Japan section expanded for a while, but it seems to have been cut down since. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 08:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

"Not to" vs "other"

Their difference is oblique. Some on the "not to" list have reasons to not do it 'at the time being' yet some on the "other" list are about the same. --Leladax (talk) 07:19, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

planning to not recognize v. countries that have stated that they don't recognize

The head of the section shouldn't be contries planning not to recognize or contries planning to not recognize. Those countries (Russia, Spain, etc.), have, according to the sources, already stated that they DON'T recognize the declaration of independence, and that they support Serbia's claim of territorial integrity. So, this is not a plan to not recognize, this is already the action of not granting recognition.

And we must remember that, under international law, only the recognition is a formal act, since the decision is made in writing, according to a certain protocol, etc. The act of not granting recognition, on the other hand, does not require such formalities. A country that does not recognize Kosovo need not reply to the Kosovar appeals for recognition, since they do not acknowledge the Kosovar "authorities" seeking recogition as having diplomatic status. Thus, such country can merely deny recongition by making an explicit statement of that position, for instance, in a press conference by the Foreign Minister, etc.

Denial of recognition works by omission, since one is not required to indicate denial by a formal document. Accordingly omission of a formal act of recognition of independence, coupled with a declaration that one does not recognize the declaration, or that one does not intend to make the act of recognition in any circumnstances, or that one support's Serbia's claim of territorial integrity, is already evidence of the decision not to recognize.

And Russia, Spain, etc, have already asserted in unequivocal terms that they do not recognize the declaration, and have indicated that they support Serbia. So, instead of saying that those countries plan not to recognize Kosovo, it should be stated that they recognize Kosovo to be a part of Serbia or that they have stated that they don't recognize Kosovar independence. --Antonio Basto (talk) 14:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Luxembourg

[8] Luxembourg is included in the so called 'second wave'. Contralya (talk) 08:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The entire article is sheer speculation. Tomer^talk 08:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Well I guess we will find out one way or another soon enough. Contralya (talk) 08:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Edit the map! 82.131.76.50 (talk) 17:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Latvia

This article [9] states in Latvian, that Latvia will base its decision on the decision of EU. I couldn't find a translation of the article in English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.58.194.243 (talk) 08:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Latvia will recognize independece of Kosovo in next few days. Source: http://www.apollo.lv/portal/news/72/articles/120828 Statement by minister of foreign affairs M.Riekstiņš. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.148.73.46 (talk) 16:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Latvia recognized independence of Kosovo [10] --M2ger (talk) 13:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Edit the map! Piilu11 (talk) 14:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

LATVIAN PEOPLE DON'T SUPORT "INDEPENDENCE" OF SEPARATIC AND OCCUPIED KOSOVO AND METOHIA.

Flags

Problems:

Brazil has the Cyprus

Canada has the Brazil flag

Portugal has the Canada flag

Sweden has the Portugal flag.

The templates are edit protected. I am going to fix it the old fashioned way until an admin that sees this fixes them. BalkanFever 09:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The icons are fine; no changes have been done to the templates. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 09:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure? I edited the page before I saw your comment, but I'm positive if you look at the two revisions you'll see something is wrong. BalkanFever 09:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I looked at the reversions, I looked at the templates; everything is fine. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 09:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I am seriously confused here. BalkanFever 09:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

It happens. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 09:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

If you are saying that next to the word "Canada" you see the flag of Canada, not the flag of Brazil, I'm going to have to take your word for it, but even after I reopened my browser, I am still seeing the Brazil flag there. BalkanFever 09:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you remember to WP:Bypass your cache and WP:purge wikipedia's cache? Nil Einne (talk) 10:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Finally, it works. Thanks to both of you :)BalkanFever 10:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

This website will not stand the test of time

I cannot imagine that we would have this website in a few years time - can you imagine us having List of states expected to recognise Montenegro or Countries that recognise Eritrea? I suggest we have this article entitled Unilateral Declaration of Independence (Kosova), as we have for other entities. Kransky (talk) 11:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

This article is fraught with problems, as has been pointed out several times above. Please contribute constructively to the discussion there, rather than creating further "crystal ball" problems with sections such as this. Thanks, Tomer^talk 11:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

As an afterword, let me say, when I first found this shoddy excuse for an article, my reaction was much the same as yours. Being something of a purist I regarded this article as an affront to the high standards I hold for Wikipedia. I have, however, come to understand the relatively relaxed attitude many people have apparently adopted with respect to it... give it a few days and the orgy of advocacy will go away. The single-issue anons will disappear back to whereëver it is they came from. Then the matter of what to do with the "article" can be resolved by responsible and regular editors, whether it's kept or merged can be resolved then. If it's deleted now, somebody somewhere has undoubtedly got a copy of it that they'll resurrect somewhere else. At least here the hyperbole and hypotheses are kept relatively well-restricted to a central location. For a few days the article will be completely unreliable, but that's what the tags at the top of it are for. Keep an eye on it to keep the more obvious rubbish out, but otherwise just let it run its course. Come Wednesday already, most likely, the cleanup will be able to commence in an orderly and reliable fashion. Cheers, Tomer^talk 11:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

It is going to be merged, but given how this is in the press now and going to be rapidly changed over time, we can't do much now. But the new article title every 2 hours is making me a little bit pissed. Just pick a name already and stick with it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

India

Announced won't recognize independence of Kosovo. Someone should find a source and add. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I did that but the source is not conclusive enough ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 16:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Is India aganist it? http://mangalorean.com/news.php?newstype=local&newsid=68188, (talk)

I found this article

http://www.thehindu.com/2008/02/19/stories/2008021959721000.htm

The article quotes the Foreign Office and says that the official standing of India is that sovereignty ans territorial integrity of all countries should be fully respected and that India supports further dialog of the concerned parties.

I think that India should be moved on the list of countries which have expressed concern over unilateral moves or expressed wish for further negotiations.

Iraq

Some information is needed on Iraq and other middle-eastern countries. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Cuba

What about Cuba. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't believe Cuba will recognise, as Belarus, North Korea, Iran and Venezuela... Kormin (talk) 15:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Belarus is siding with Russia on just general feeling, but nothing on recognition yet. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

"planning not to..." or "planning to not..."

"Countries planning not to recognize" vs. "Countries plaining to not recognize":

As Estoy Aquí mentioned, the "to not" phrasing is awkward. Which is in part why phrasing it that way conveys an emphasis on the definitive nature of the action in question. The usual word-order "not to" would imply that these countries are planning to have no formal opinion about it one way or the other. They are, for the most part, in fact planning to have a definite formal opinion about it. Leaving it as "to not" is the best way to convey that sense in a short-hand "headline-ese" way.

But not real important, either way!

--Wikiscient (talk) 13:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

article name

This article should be renamed International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence. Kingturtle (talk) 13:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I have moved it. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 14:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Kazakhstan

...won't recognize Kosovo. Any source? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 15:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

No sources yet about Kazak'... Kormin (talk) 15:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I heard that all the members of the OIC will recognize it , isnt Kazakhstan a member ? --Cradel 15:44, 20 February 2008 (UTC)