Talk:Destruction of Albanian heritage in Kosovo

Reason

User:Resnjari, Riedlmayer gives the reasons why the post-war destruction of Orthodox sites did happen. Since it was a consequence of the destruction of Albanian heritage sites, do you think this article should elaborate more on the reasons of destruction of Orthodox sites? One or two more sentences I would say, just to balance the article. The aim is to make reader understand that destruction of Orthodox sites took place only after war and it was only for revenge by returning Albanian refugees whose home places were totally ruined by Serbian police\army\mafia. The destruction of sites was not a well-planned action carried by Albanian elite as government of Serbia want it to look like. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:23, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

User:Ktrimi991, i added something of the sort to the Destruction of Serbian heritage in Kosovo [1] based on Herscher's research. Riedlmayer, from memory has something, forgot where though. Not sure if we should add that info here as its about destroyed Albanian architecture in Kosovo. On my part i see it more applicable for the other article, though if we do place something here it would probably go in the Legacy section. Maybe rename that section to as something else like Post-conflict Kosovo ? I leave this up to you, a fresh pair of eyes to go over. Best.Resnjari (talk) 22:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

User:Ktrimi991 & User:Calthinus, i added content as per Herscher to address issues both of you outlined here in the talkpage and the tag that was added in the article previously. Have a look/check to see if more needs to be done or if its ok. Best.Resnjari (talk) 07:00, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Hmm I don't remember commenting here before but I'll give it a look in some time, sure.--Calthinus (talk) 16:05, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Not about commenting in here, though you placed a tag in the article [2], which where similar concerns as expressed by Ktrimi in here. Best.Resnjari (talk) 02:35, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

My bad, that I did haha. And looks good mostly. One thing I say that would improve is breaking up more of the walls of text-- they're hard on the eyes for those who aren't already well-versed in the topic. --Calthinus (talk) 05:59, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. Ok, will do. Best.Resnjari (talk) 06:06, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Calthinus, well i went through it and i hope it is ok. Have a look there might be a bit more, but hopefully much of the grammar and stuff has been ironed out. Best.Resnjari (talk) 09:58, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

"Albanian" heritage

I would think that the Pristina bazaar is an example of Kosovo's Ottoman – not Albanian – heritage. If you're going to write an article like this, at least describe instances where the cultural heritage of Albanians was destroyed and/or damaged, and not that of other groups. 23 editor (talk) 15:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

All shops demolished were owned by Albanians, hence the whole bazzar and that is outlined in the article. All Muslim and Ottoman heritage destroyed during the Kosovo War (1999) was considered by the Yugoslav Serb army as Albanian (and it belonged to the Albanian community). Read the academic sources, its all cited quite densely and very detailed meeting the requirements of wp:reliable and wp:secondary.Resnjari (talk) 15:33, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I have to say I agree with the previous comment. "Albanian owned" doesn't make anything Albanian heritage. Some mosques might be listed as property of Serbia (I don't know, but it's often the case in some countries to list all religious sites as state-owned because of legal reasons, protection of cultural heritage etc), but you wouldn't say that "mosques are Serbian heritage". They are either part of Turkish, or Albanian, and certainly Muslim, therefore unlikely "Serbian heritage".

Ownership is really a ridiculous argument when it comes to heritage. 109.245.206.118 (talk) 08:44, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

• Comment - Ottoman heritage ≠ Albanian heritage. Also Islamic buildings ≠ Albanian heritage. Since the second half of the 15th century there is a substantial Turkish Muslim population on Kosovo along with Islamized Slavic population. Proclaiming all of Ottoman heritage as Albanian is not what sources in the article say. The Ottoman heritage has, of course, never considered as belonging to the Albanian community in Yugoslavia or Serbia. Yugoslavia protected ie Sinan Pasha mosque as its own monument of exceptional importance since 1948 (link). Many Islamic buildings are defined by law as monuments of exceptional importance in Republic of Serbia, including many Islamic or Ottoman buildings on Kosovo. Proclaiming all Muslim and Ottoman heritage destroyed during the Kosovo War (1999) as belonging to Albanians and naming the article consequently is violation of NPOV policy.User:Antidiskriminator/signing template--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:03, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Are you refering to the disproven Arnautaš theory [3] about a "substantial Turkish Muslim population on Kosovo along with Islamized Slavic population"? The mosques of people who identify as Turks in Kosovo like those in Mamusa or villages of Slavic Gorani, or Muslim Slavic speaking villages in Srecke/Sredcka Zupa were not attacked during the war -unless there is information stating otherwise. Only Islamic and Ottoman era monuments of the Albanian community - Herscher's & Riedlmayer's report was accepted as evidence by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) specifically pointing this out about it being Albanian heritage and it being targeted because of that. Is there any evidence/scholarship stating that the ICTY is false ? In a historical context Ottoman and Muslim heritage in Kosovo was never considered as Serbian or Yugoslav in general and the scholarship notes that overall it was neglected subject to damages during that time. Also if we take your point on board about the article title of this page, then the article title of the Destruction of Serbian heritage in Kosovo page is problematic as not all Orthodox people in Kosovo are Serb as there is Orthodox Romani [4] - who also use those churches etc. If you want to remove issues of the sort, then one can start with that article due to it violating NPOV policy and changing the title to Destruction of Orthodox heritage in Kosovo.Resnjari (talk) 03:30, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Sources misrepresentation

Several sources used in this article does not refer the mentioned text. It looks like this article is corrected in order to present "proper" POV. Tagged until checked in detail. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 00:24, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

@Anastan:, can you explain which sources here an issue, as i have the sources right here on my desk. All sources used refer to the content directly and have been heavily cited. They also meet the criteria of wp:reliable and wp:secondary.Resnjari (talk) 00:25, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Actually, several sources does not exactly mention the terms used in this article. We have so many original research here. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 00:32, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Actually they do, borrow the books its all there.Resnjari (talk) 00:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

No, they are not. I have several of them, and again, they DO NOT MENTION EXACT TERMS FROM THIS ARTICLE. Dont remove templates without agreement, that is again wiki guidelines. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 00:43, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

@Anastan:, you do have the sources (?), well excellent then i guess. Show me exactly how they "DO NOT MENTION EXACT TERMS FROM THIS ARTICLE". Bit by bit and please be detailed. If you had the sources you would not place tags for verification which means you don't have the sources. These tags can stay i don't mind. You are right there is Wikipedia guidelines and policy. Remember wp:idontlikeit reasons does not constitute a reason for tag bombing. If you don't come up with something in the near future showing how there are really issues, tags will be removed.Resnjari (talk) 00:50, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

For those wanting to have a detailed discussion about the sources and content, i am ready to go. Make sure to ping me when you want to start. Best.Resnjari (talk) 01:03, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Kosovo heritage

Have you give a thought of merging these two articles, Albanian heritage and Serbian heritage, under the title "Destruction of Kosovo heritage"? Under better circumstances, all Kosovo people would, should, consider all heritage their own, regardless of their origins (ethnicity and religion), and certainly anyone outside Kosovo must see it that way.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 02:36, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

You can Prizren heritage Prizren heritage, ofc it would include churches, mosques, Prizren league house etc. But either way, churches happen to be part of Serbian, mosques Ottoman, and Prizren league monument-house Albanian heritage. Ethnic heritages much wider than Prizren, just like they are much wider than Kosovo heritage, in all cases. I could write about how each ethnic corpus sees this "other people's" heritage, but suffice to say - not in a good light. In most cases, symbols of oppression, rather than cultural diversity.

If you look at Kosovo budget for cultural and religious sites, they are handing money out "based on demographics", 10x more for Albanian mosques restoration, even if there are some 130 medieval Serbian churches, dozens of important Ottoman-period mosques, while Albanian mosques are the youngest of them all, therefore requiring least financial aid, although some Ottoman-era mosques are also in a way part of Albanian, sometimes even Serbian heritage.

How could Kosovo*, a "country" that continues with institutionalized destruction of everything Serbian, claim that Serbian churches are "Kosovan", when Kosovo is just a new addition to Albanian, ethnically homogenous Albanian state, created in "liberation movement" in which hundreds of churches and Orthodox graveyards were destroyed? Two priests decapitated in just fey days after the Kumanovo peace was signed. Pec patriarchate throne church and complex burned every few decades. 109.245.206.118 (talk) 09:02, 26 June 2023 (UTC)