Talk:Kopaonik

Serbia High‑importance

	Serbia portal This article 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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Kosovo High‑importance

	Kopaonik is part of WikiProject Kosovo, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Kosovo on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.KosovoWikipedia:WikiProject KosovoTemplate:WikiProject KosovoKosovo articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Protected areas Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

SRBIJA BATO!!!

Split article[edit]

Should this article be split into Kopaonik and Kopaonik national park? --Bolonium 20:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it should, but who will do it. Kopaonik National Park is located in the north of the mountain (in Serbia) but the bulk of the mountain is in Kosovo. -- Imbris (talk) 00:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am including this project into wikiproject kosovo as an article to review for neutrality. We need to enforce a WP:NPOV here. James Michael DuPont (talk) 06:22, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo-geo-stub[edit]

Hello, did you remove this for any reason? According to the GNS and the albanian wikipedia, this point is part of Kosovo.

{{Kosovo-geo-stub}}

thanks, mike James Michael DuPont (talk) 14:25, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article is not stub... DO you know what WP:STUB is? -WhiteWriter ^speaks 15:58, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Look this mountain is half in Kosovo. I dont want to have to fight with you over this every day. see Oštro_Koplje. Please please please, lets resolve this. James Michael DuPont (talk) 16:18, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I responded below. That template above should not be used, as article is not stub. --WhiteWriter ^speaks 16:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On Kopaonik mountain dose not live Albanians . Mountain is partly on Kosovo ,but ,as we all know borders or status of Kosovo is not defined and it's not UN recognised country, as well that on the mountain on both sides are leaving Serbs we don't support that on the article should be given Albanian translation, and 'Kosovo' status must be shown. Article like it is now we (people who live on this mountain ) with Albanian translation are not support and look on this issue like bullying. So please stop bullying and political provocations in this article and permanently delete Albanian translation and do not put word 'Kosovo' together with word Serbia on the top of this article In description part. I agree to be on lower parts of articles explained, but in top part it is pretentious and it's having violent meaning. Please take this as an advice PakleniVuk (talk) 01:44, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

POV[edit]

This article must contain information about the half of the mountain and peaks inside of Kosovo. This information is being repeatdly removed. I dont have time to fight over this every day. Do not remove the POV notice until we get some neutral information about this mountain. thanks Mike James Michael DuPont (talk) 16:21, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not half, it is only very small part. I fixed that info, if you need some more, talk here. Also, we need some sources about that, if you have some reliable sources, write those here. We need sources for that kind of editing. You dont need to tag with your strange tag anything, just write on talk page with your propositions. That will be enough. --WhiteWriter ^speaks 16:57, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Kopaonik. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111106041357/http://www.npkopaonik.com:80/Turizam/Turizam-na-Kopaoniku.html to http://www.npkopaonik.com/Turizam/Turizam-na-Kopaoniku.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:29, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Split proposed[edit]

The ski resort/tourist centre should be split from this article. There is also confusion over whether this article is for the mountain range/massif or the mountain itself.--Zoupan 01:47, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kopaonik. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131007225220/http://serbski.com/ to http://www.serbski.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:00, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help abuot correction on Kopaonik ,and note for future possible vandalism[edit]

Can someone help to change where is written 'in Kosovo and Serbia' need to be ' in Serbia and partly on deputy territory of Kosovo ' with additional for Kosovo in Notes like in other articles ? Some 'people' are constantly bullying and vandalise this article with incorrect info and trying to force some political issue and propaganda on this page. To be clear ,in light of everything ,on Kopaonik mountain don't leave Albanians or 'Kosovar' people, 100%of population are Serbs . One part of mountain is behind administrative line and it is on Kosovo ,BUT ,from the boat sides are Serbs ,and administrative line between Kosovo and Serbia is not Border line . Administrative line is hold by KFOR and Serbain army . When someone vandalise article (like now) he (or she) is actually pretending on someone's territory and suggest on ethnic cleansing . In that light, and tolerance I suggest changes like this including Notes like here. Thank you.

A few clarifications. The Kopaonik range extends all the way to the Lab and Sitnica rivers (this is mentioned in the article). That area roughly corresponds to Podujevo Municipality which is inhabited overwhelmingly by Albanians. Just on that basis having the Albanian name included in the article is warranted. Kopaonik north of that is inhabited by Serbs. Regarding Kosovo's status, it has been standard practice know for a prolonged period of time to just refer to it as Kosovo, and a note explaining the status issue.Resnjari (talk) 19:17, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Resnjari take a look at changes I'll made ,and tell me what do you think. I have accepted your explanation about Podujevo. I have changed order -Kosovo,Sebia-in to -Srebia ,Kosovo to be in order with references and added note. Didn't change language transaction on Albanian . Is it acceptable like this from your point?

I removed "territory of". Having Kosovo as was on its own was ok. Also i don;t get why you deleted this reference [1]. The book is fine and meets the requirements of WP:RELIABLESOURCES. The books mentions something about Kopaonik, that's why its used in the article.Resnjari (talk) 23:32, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Book is on France language and it's about national changes in former Yugoslavia not about earthquake on Kopaonik mountain. Might be better if we link some better article from where is explained or where is given better info just about earthquake. Book explain political earthquake not natural earthquake

There is no issue with the text being in French. Roux is fine and his study is highly regarded by other scholars like Ger Duijzings [2], [3] (1999). I found the actual page via url by Roux: p.93 [4]) and he cites earthquakes that hit Kopaonik. So it checks out.Resnjari (talk) 02:00, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]