This template is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
About a month ago, this template was clearly POV - it indicated that the airports in Kosovo were in Serbia. So I amended the template to highlight which airports are in Kosovo, and gave the table a new heading: "Airports and airfields in Serbia (with Kosovo)". Earlier today User:Alchaemia removed all Kosovo airports, commenting "It is POV to include these airport as in Serbia". However I felt that his new version was also POV, so I have reverted back to my version. Saying that the Kosovo airports are in Serbia is biased (Serbian POV); saying that they are not in Serbia is also biased (Albanian POV). I feel that my version is most appropriate as it shows a balanced view. The heading "...Serbia (with Kosovo)" can, I feel, be interpreted in either way, e.g. Serbia which includes Kosovo, or Serbia and additionally Kosovo. It's not perfect, but I can't think of a better way of wording it. ("Serbia and Kosovo" for example, would imply that the two are separate.) The title of the template itself "Airports in Serbia" was clearly POV, so I have moved it to "Airports in Serbia with Kosovo". I am not convinced that this move was entirely necessary because you can't see template names when you're viewing pages that includes them. But no harm in the move either. I hope these amendments are acceptable. Please discuss here if not. Bazonka (talk) 15:40, 6 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
User:Bolonium has changed the heading of the template back to just "Airports and airfields in Serbia", claiming "Reverted POV-pushing - a footnote exists to point out a self-declared, independent state". I think that this is just plain wrong. The heading preferred by Bolonium gives more weight to the argument that Kosovo is in Serbia (clear POV). Whilst the footnote does show the counter-argument, in footnote form it is not as strong. I cannot understand how the longer title (with "(with Kosovo)") is in any way more biased. Bazonka (talk) 17:30, 4 August 2011 (UTC)Reply
Majority of nations in the world see Kosovo as a province within Serbia so why must we say 'Serbia (with Kosovo)'. Kosovo is barely a nation. I'm not saying this just because I'm of Serbian origin but because more than half the world see's Kosovo as part of Serbia. Just seems like we are pushing Kosovo as if it is an independent nation.
Please read WP:NPOV - Wikipedia must give a balanced view, and not take sides. It doesn't matter that most countries view Kosovo as being part of Serbia, because there is a sizeable minority that don't. Therefore we must not say that Kosovo is part of Serbia, and equally we mustn't say that Kosovo is independent of Serbia.
By removing the "(with Kosovo)" part of the title of this template, we are implying that every airport listed below is in Serbia, despite the footnote. This is fine with your POV, but not with that of others. Similarly, if we were to remove the Kosovan airports from the list, it would be reflecting the opposite POV, and would also be unacceptable.
I do not underatand how you think that the template is "pushing Kosovo as if it is an independent nation"; it is just acknowledging, but not endorsing, one commonly-held opinion. If you think that there are other parts of Wikipedia that do push the independent Kosovo POV, then these should be addressed and made more balanced. Bazonka (talk) 18:14, 15 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
