Montenegro

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montenegro, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Montenegro 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.MontenegroWikipedia:WikiProject MontenegroTemplate:WikiProject MontenegroMontenegro ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:Cv-unsure

As the official language talked by 2/3 of the population of Montenegro is Serbian, there should be at least Serbian / Montenegrin and not just political term for one language, in base Serbian. Please add. Thank you. 109.93.2.231 (talk) 17:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please add a quote of king Nikola Petrovic "Let's go Montenegrins, onto Bar, our Serb Bar, onto Serb sea". You can find it in all historical books, museums, more info at website like www.njegos.org. Thank you. 109.93.2.231 (talk) 17:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose that the date in the sentence "prince Mihailo, asked for and got the royal crown from Rome in 1977" is a mistake.

The sentence "in 1908 the first railroad in this part of the Balkans was put into operation in 1913" is unclear.

The sentence: "... In 1945, between 400 and 2,000 Albanians were killed in Bar by Yugoslav Communist Partisans." is unclear, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.12.130.226 (talk) 15:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This first railway in Principality of Montenegro, also known as Crna Gora, was a narrow gauge railway gauge 750 mm and it connected Principality´s harbour at Antivari to Vir-Pazar located at the southern coast of Lake Skutari. Its lenght was 43 km and it was opened in 1909. It was financed by an Italian company, registered in Venezia, but all the locomotives and rolling stock were bought from Germany. It was in operation up to 1959 when being replaced by new standard gauge 1435 mm railway from Bar to Titograd.

In summer 1914, just before The Shots of Sarajevo, the Bar - Vir-Pazar railway operated daily one passenger pair of trains and one freight train with others marked "if required". The morning train departured from Antivari at 9.10 and arrived, with stops in every station at noon 12.00 to Vir-Pazar. It returned from Vir-Pazar as early afternoon train departing from vir-Pazar at 13.55 and arrived to Antivari at 16.50. The railway even owned three steam coaches, built by the Borsig in Berlin and one of them was used when required by the King Nikita and the members of the Royal Family and other important persons. They were not a success and were later rebuilt to ordinary steam locomotives.

In winter 1940-1941 the railway was still operated by the "Privatna zeleznica Barskog Drvurstva". The daily train departed from Bar-Antivari at 7.30 and arrived to Virpazar at 10.00. The return train departed at 13.30 and arrived to Bar-Antivari at 16.00. The only change happened over this period was the gauge change from 750 mm to 760 mm gauge. Four of the original steam locomotives and six passenger coaches were still preserved in Bar. in 1989. Originally all locomotives carried names not numbers. One of them ended into Czechoslovakia and one to Austria one to Hungary and one to Poland. Some were later transferred to Bosnian and Herzegovinian narrow gauge lines. One operated its last active duty at Herceg Novi (Baccho di Cattoro) hauling local school trains between Igalo and Zelenica before the line was closed.

Orenstein & Koppel 2556 / 1907 Dt Societa Anonyme Compagnia Bar-Virpazar "PAPAGINO" -> "ZETA"

Orenstein & Koppel 2557 / 1907 Dt Societa Anonyme Compagnia Bar-Virpazar "VOLPI" -> "BOKA"

Orenstein & Koppel 2558 / 1907 Dt Societa Anonyme Compagnia Bar-Virpazar "MARCONI" -> "DURMITOR"

Borsig 6902 / 1908 Bt2+2 Societa Anonyme Compagnia di Antivari "RIJEKA" Dampftriebwagen

Borsig 6903 / 1908 Bt2+2 Societa Anonyme Compagnia di Antivari "NIKSIC" Dampftriebwagen

Borsig 6904 / 1909 Bt2+2 Societa Anonyme Compagnia di Antivari "CETINJE" Dampftriebwagen

Borsig 7601 / 1910 1BBt Societa Anonyme Compagnia di Antivari "SUTORMAN"

Borsig 7602 / 1910 1BBt Societa Anonyme Compagnia di Antivari "RUMIJA"

Orenstein & Koppel 4115 / 1910 Dt Societa Anonyme Compagnia Bar-Virpazar "LOVCEN"

For historical purposes it may be worth to name all the stations on the railway: Bar-Antivari (0), Popovic (2), Zubci (7), Ribnjak (11), Tudgemile (13), Sutorman (21), Dubrava (29), Limljani (33), Boljavic (38), Virpazar (41).

The next 21 km railway in area of Kingdom of Montenegro was built in 1916 by the German army from Podgorica to Donja Plavnica on the opposite northern shore of Lake Skutari. It was built for pure military purposes for the Central Powers and was of standard German Feldbahn type narrow gauge of 600 mm gauge railway. This railway was operated at least to 1944. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.205.131 (talk) 04:58, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

I have the copyright to place some informations from the website of the Tourist Organistation of Bar..www.visitbar.com,because i am aliving in Bar,and i have the permission from them to place some information that they gave on that site.I didnt copy any information from http://www.photomontenegro.me/tag/bar/lang/en/.I only inserted stuff from the site of TO Bar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krivi94 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems very likely that content added to this article in November 2009 ([1]) was pasted from a promotional source, but I have not located anything that I can exclude as a mirror. I'm tagging the article in case somebody else can clarify. In any event, the content (much of which remains) is clearly inappropriate in tone for a Wikipedia article. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:38, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This page has been severely vandalised in past few days. User registered as Mugosa, and users from IP addresses 95.155.46.96, 109.228.77.130 and 62.68.117.98 vandalised the page, introducing offeniseve comments regarding the Mayor of Bar. Vandal acts have been repeated several times, they have been reported to Wikipedia administrators, no reaction against them have been taken. Could this page be locked in order to prevent future vandal acts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BarMNE (talk • contribs) 12:12, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bar, Montenegro. 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/20081010021613/http://www.ulcinjtoday.com:80/Old-Bar-Fortress.html to http://www.ulcinjtoday.com/Old-Bar-Fortress.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 12:47, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bar, Montenegro. 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/20090223182352/http://www.barinfo.co.me/ to http://www.barinfo.co.me/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 02:16, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

At 6% of the population, the Albanian population of Bar is not significant enough for the Albanian name to be added in the first line of the lede. The inclusion of Italian is even more puzzling, since there are no Italians in town. The claim that "Albanian is official in Bar" is entirely unsourced, and there is also no policy that states that anything "official" belongs in the first line of the lede. The existence of a name section makes inclusion of alternate names in the lede unecessary, and this whole things smacks of WP:NATIONALIST "flag-planting". Khirurg (talk) 16:50, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The name itself is of Italian origin and the place had for a long time an Italian-speaking population. Albanian is official [2], and Albanians have always been an important element, especially in the south of the municipality. Is not Sarande with its Italian and Greek names in the lede the same thing? Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:58, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You will need an official Montenegrin source for the claim that Albanian is official in Bar. 6% is not significant enough for the first line of the lede (Greeks in Saranda are much more than 6%). If it was 20-25% I'd agree, but 6% is just not going to cut it. As for Italian, it is even more WP:UNDUE in the very first line of the lede. The name section exists for this reason, and the (hopefully sourced) claim that the name is Italian in origin can be added there. Khirurg (talk) 17:07, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Until 2017, in Montenegro a language had official status if it was used by at least 15% of the population. In 2017, the law changed and languages spoken by 5% of the population of a municipality acquired official status. The changes affected Albanian in Bar and Rožaje [3] and Croatian in Kotor Municipality. --Maleschreiber (talk) 17:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You will need an official Montenegrin source to back that claim, not some snippet from some Albanian newspaper that claims this to be the case. Khirurg (talk) 17:21, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I cited Koha Ditore, a newspaper which has received many journalism awards. The same news piece was published by Televizioni Klan and many other media [4]. The announcement of the law change in the state sponsored Albanian newspaper in Montenegro: [5] in 2016. Interview with Minister for Minorities Leon Gjokaj about the law changes in 2016 [6] (0:55 "in all municipalities which Albanian is 5% or more.." If Montenegro had a functional & digitalized official government gazette, I would have cited that too.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So you're basically admitting that you have not a single official (or even non-official) Montenegrin source to confirm this, only Albanian newspapers. You also have failed to cite any policy that states that a name used by ~5% of the population belongs in the first line of the lede, despite the existence of a name section. Khirurg (talk) 17:36, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Khirurg, why did you delete a part of Maleschreiber's post where they mentioned an Montenegrin official [7]? Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Khirurg What's the point of such changes? You know very well that such changes require consensus and consequently such a consensus here will have to be made on other similar articles on the region. Do not forget that you are using double standards for the cities in the south of Albania with what you are suggesting here. Anyway, here you have the official law that you can read, while in many articles that you and others protect which are similar to this type of format there are neither laws nor the minimum standard used in this article. So enough with such changes.Bes-ARTTalk 17:47, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's still WP:SYNTH. If Albanian was indeed official in Bar (since 2017 as it is claimed), you should be able to produce a source that confirms official use of Albanian in Bar. Khirurg (talk) 17:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is a link to the official gazette there and a PDF in English. If you have a problem with it in English you can use the official in Cyrillic or whatever. Bes-ARTTalk 18:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are many reports from Koha Ditore and other media which discuss which municipalities are affected by the changes. --Maleschreiber (talk) 18:05, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• (edit conflict) The Albanian name was part of the lede for a long time[8]. I cited the Minister for Minorities of Montenegro who announced the law changes which made Albanian an official language in municipalities where it is spoken by at least 5% of the population. It is on the lede because it is official. If it was spoken by 10% but it wasn't official, there would be no reason to mention it at the lede. If Montenegro changes its language law, it should be removed. If you consider a legitimate concern the possibility that the Minister for Minorities of Montenegro may have announced something which never happened or that all major Albanian media reported false news a year later, you should file a discussion at WP:RSN. @Ktrimi991: Thanks for restoring my comment Ktrimi. I didn't notice that it was altered.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:49, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"WP:Long time" is not a valid argument or Wikipedia policy. 6% is just not going to cut it. Anyway, we're just going around in the usual circles here. As for your comment, it was an edit conflict. WP:AGF and all that. Khirurg (talk) 17:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For the institutions of Montenegro, 5% is enough. Side comment: Such legislation is truly progressive whether it involves Albanians or Croats or any other people. Everybody should have the right to use their mother tongue in their relations with state authorities.--Maleschreiber (talk) 18:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The purposes of the institutions in Montenegro and the purposes of wikipedia are different things. Name sections exist for a reason. I presume you would be ok with adding Greek and Serbian names in the first line of the lede for places where these are 6% or more of the local population? Khirurg (talk) 18:06, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be ok for adding them if they are official names even if they constitute 1% of the total population or if they constitute a substantial part of the population. Every society has the right to choose its own rules.--Maleschreiber (talk) 18:25, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And wikipedia has its own rules and policies. ~5% is not a substantial enough for the first line of the lede. Khirurg (talk) 18:48, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Khirurg, if "Name sections exist for a reason", why did you add the Greek name to the first sentence of the Alexandria article, for instance? Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:33, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to time zone, see whataboutism. Khirurg (talk) 18:53, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since the Albanian name is not going to be removed no matter how much you insist, read WP:RFC and then either seek dispute resolution or stop wasting your time here. I am sure your concept of a time zone does not prevent your from proposing your changes through other paths to consensus building. Bye again, Ktrimi991 (talk) 19:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent idea, I was thinking the same thing myself. Especially based on past experience. Khirurg (talk) 04:16, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should the Albanian name be included in the first line of the lede? Khirurg (talk) 04:19, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose as WP:UNDUE. As the 2011 census shows [9] (Table N1 and Table N2), Albanians constitute less than 1% percent of Bar town. Note that there is a name section where alternate names, including Albanian, are given. The question is whether the Albanian name belongs in the first line of the lede, and this about as clear a case of WP:UNDUE as it gets. While Albanians make up 5-6% of the municipality, there is a separate article for Bar Municipality. Even for the municipality, the figure for 5-6% is far too low, and the claims that it is official are very poorly sourced (only to some Albanian newspapers), but no official documents that Albanian is official have been produced, despite the claim that this occurred in 2017. Khirurg (talk) 04:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC) Going on past experience, I expect a fair amount of "ethnic piling" to occur here, and this should be taken account by the closer.[reply]
• Support not removing the Albanian name Albanians make up more than 5% of Bar municipality. that makes Albanian an official language in bar, not just the Albanian speaking areas in Bar but in the entire municipality and the cities and towns within. the question of RfC is confusing to me. the Albanian name has been in the first line of the lede. if anyone wants to remove it, shouldn't the question be "should Albanian be removed from the lede?" Durraz0 (talk) 11:42, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]