This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Balkan / European / French / North America / United States / Post-Cold War B‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history B This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale. Associated task forces: /  Balkan military history task force (c. 500 – present) European military history task force French military history task force North American military history task force United States military history task force Post-Cold War task force Serbia High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Kosovo High‑importance Kosovo War 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Albania High‑importance Kosovo War is part of the WikiProject Albania, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Albania 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.AlbaniaWikipedia:WikiProject AlbaniaTemplate:WikiProject AlbaniaAlbania High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Limited recognition Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Limited recognition, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the coverage of entities with limited recognition on Wikipedia by contributing to articles relating to unrecognized states and separatist movements. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join our WikiProject by signing your name at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.Limited recognitionWikipedia:WikiProject Limited recognitionTemplate:WikiProject Limited recognitionLimited recognition Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

European history

This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

To be honest I'm surprised why "NATO intervention debated" is even there in the Results. I don't remember seeing any war infobox containing a result like that. Of course there might be debate over it. But isn't it non-relevant? It is highly insignificant. The intervention happened and we shouldn't be adding "debated" just because it is among some. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 22:22, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

agree, at best it's poor phrasing. Pincrete (talk) 09:56, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure what "NATO intervention debated" is supposed to mean: that NATO debated intervening; that it is debatable whether the intervention was a NATO one? Neither makes much sense. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:15, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it means 'criticised', rather than 'debated', but that isn't an outcome unless it resulted in a UN censure (for eg). The source doesn't really support anything except for the specific criticism of hitting too many civilian targets during the intervention.Pincrete (talk) 13:51, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, it was debated, and that was indeed result. It's definitely not insignificant. I do wonder as well though what this specifically refers to. At first I thought it meant the intervention just went badly and had some goofs, but perhaps it refers to their reasons being controversial and/or its legitimacy being debated. The source only supports some goofs, which by the way include the highly significant NATO bombing of the Chinese embassy. Prinsgezinde (talk) 23:48, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Debated by whom is the obvious Q.Pincrete (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The source used refers to criticism during the campaign, so it isn't even a result. I'm sure better sources and better phrasing could be found if the post-campaign criticism is the intended meaning. Pincrete (talk) 16:13, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it's weird and out of place. I suggest we remove it from the infobox and insert it somewhere in the text.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've simple removed, there is already an entire section on 'criticism'.Pincrete (talk) 19:08, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Karen Donfried (1999), Kosovo: International Reactions to NATO Air Strikes, Congressional Research Service

The John Pilger citation (number 62) in the opening section should link to this page: https://www.newstatesman.com/node/151946

The citation reads: 'Pilger, John (September 4, 2000). "US and British officials told us that at least 100,000 were murdered in Kosovo. A year later, fewer than 3,000 bodies have been found". New Statesman." and links to the wrong New Statesman article, here: http://www.newstatesman.com/node/138456 and redirects to https://www.newstatesman.com/europe/2014/02/belgium-extends-its-euthanasia-laws-children Mrhota (talk) 02:32, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Spintendo      04:56, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

user:Illegitimate Barrister, I reverted some of your series of edits. Many of the early ones seem constructive, others less so. If I reverted at the 'wrong' point, I apologise.

Firstly, I'm not wholly sure of your premise that the article is - or should be - UK English. Kosovo has no strong connection to the UK.

Even if it is, what sense does it make to change 'planes' to 'aeroplanes', the second is somewhat anachronistic even in the UK, whereas 'planes' is understood and used in all variants of Eng. Has anybody ever used the term "Stealth aeroplanes' or 'decoy aeroplanes'?

I see the sense of using US/UN or U.S./U.N. etc in a consistent way throughout - but why change 'American' into 'US'? Especially in sentences where 'Albanian' and 'British' are not abbreviated, frankly it's a bit disengenuous to claim that 'US' is UK usage, but 'American' isn't. I have no feelings either way about adding/omitting full-stops (periods) to abbreviation and am not sure which is more 'British', but agree that it would be good to be consistent throughout.

I'm posting here as I would welcome other editors input - beginning with whether the article IS UK Eng - but continuing with how far we should take that. Pincrete (talk) 19:35, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article is, or is supposed to be, in UK English, as the top of the article says {{Use British English|date=November 2014}}. My edits are just keeping in line with that.

• According to Wiktionary, aeroplane is still acceptable in UK English.
• The BBC seems to prefer US over American so that's why I did that edit.

– Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 23:49, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, you are right about the article being UK English - I should have seen.

I still think it makes sense to use a 'universal' term when one is available (eg planes) and to be consistent and flexible when using or not using the tersest abbreviated form of a country or org's name when it is helpful. It's easy to end up with needless 'acronym-ese' ("The US and UK were criticised in the UN because of the NATO raid on the PRC embassy in FRY"?).

As you see, I happily use 'UK' on talk pages - but would probably use 'British' in articles. BTW, I make the same arguments on US-Eng pages (pet hate being 'Hollywood-isms' like an actor being 'slated' (provisionally contracted) to play a part). Let's see what others think. Pincrete (talk) 10:09, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. But I need to remember the pages to explain to all those controversial elements about the Kosovo war. Especially its beginning.

When did the war in Kosovo and Metohija begin? The first serious war conflict was an introduction to the village of Likosane, but it is questionable whether it was on February 27 or 28, 1998. Did the Drenica group of the KLA under the command of Adem Jashari start a partisan attack on the FRY Police on Friday evening before midnight on February 27th or the night between 27th and 28th of February or Saturday morning of February 28th, 1998? Albanians claim that the attack followed on February 28 in the early hours before dawn. Albanians celebrate February 28 as the day of the uprising against the "Serbian occupier". Serbs claim that on February 28, 1998, the Albanians launched the first synchronized "terrorist attack" against members of the security forces who launched the attack on Drenica on the same day, when on March 5 they liquidated Adem Jashari with 45 family members. The question remains whether the KLA members from Drenica attacked on February 27 evening or on the 28th of February in the morning. Everything related to this war is known. Nothing started spontaneously. Can you explain on Vikipedia more than three years the exact date of the beginning of the war conflict? Before Likosane, there was not a serious armed incident with a lot of dead policemen between Serbs and Albanians. In the period 1995, 1996 and 1997 there was sporadic shootings and criminal killings and occasional terrorist attacks on the police and Serb and Albanian civilians during human casualties, as well as an armed incident without casualties in the night between January 22nd and 23rd, 1998 Armed conflict in the chain began after the conflict in the village of Likosane and the whole political issue in Kosovo and Metohija was opened on the interstate scene. Each subsequent armed conflict took on warfare with substantially larger victims and displaced populations on both sides. It seems incredible that you do not know how to reconcile more than three years around the start of the war, and Serbs and Albanians can. Plus, you have all documents of all armed incidents. — Baba Mica (talk) 15:40, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is there at least some voting system by the admine to determine the exact date or gambling? The Kosovo war was not before the new era, in the old age, in the Middle Ages, or a few hundred years ago, so it's hard to decide or there is no data? The Kosovo war was bipping out less than 20 years ago. All documents exist and a process was conducted before the international court. — Baba Mica (talk) 15:55, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any need to be more precise then "Late Februari 1998"? The Banner talk 16:52, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Same question + do sources give a specific date? Pincrete (talk) 18:52, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article Attacks on Likošane and Ćirez is correct on February 27. This is the first open armed conflict between the KLA and the FRY police. We all know that February 27 and February 28 is the last day of February. However, according to such a criterion, we can say that the [[Winter War] began at the end of November and not on November 30, 1939. Or for the Greek Civil War that it began in late March and not on March 30, 1946. We can also say that the Soviet-Afghan War began at the end of December, and not on December 24, 1979, although the start of Soviet operations has been disputed in Russia for years. The Croatian War of Independence and Bosnian War are even more controversial, where the opposing parties have their own theory and it was much more difficult to reconcile with the start date. For the Croatian War of Independence, all parties finally agreed that the beginning of this conflict was on March 31, 1991, but for a long time on Wikipedia was the beginning of this war conflict of the spring conflict in 1991 or only in March 1991. Bosnian war was particularly complicated and the international community decided on the completely inaccurate date of the start of the armed conflict on 6 April 1992, the date of international recognition. The first open-ended armed incident happened on March 1 of the same year on the day of the referendum when Ramiz Delalić killed at the wedding of the father of the Serbian groom Nikol Gardović, followed by a series of armed incidents and raising barricades by Serbs and Bosniaks. Until April 6, about 1,000 people died on all three sides, and in the village of Sijekovac, the HVO launched an open military aggression on March 26 through the Sava River, killing 47 Serb civilians in a very cruel manner. On April 1, the JNA from Serbia carried out an open military attack on the Drina River and committed a massacre in the town of Bijeljina nad Bosnjaci, and on April 4, Sarajevo was bombed from a mortar. Bosniaks count on April 1, 1992 at the beginning of the Bosnian War. Croats consider something third as the theoretical beginning Bosnian war. This is the beginning of the siege of Dubrovnik when units of the JNA crossed the Croatian Ethnic Area Popovo polje and attacked the northern side of Dubrovnik on October 1, 1991. However, the JNA passed that day only through the southern part of Bosnia and Herzegovina and arrived in Dubrovnik for several hours. In Bosnia and Herzegovina there were no armed conflicts in the autumn of 1991. So, the Croatian version of the beginning of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina has nothing to do with the brain. However, I challenge Wikipedia over the years because of which the period from March 1 to April 6 has been omitted, and why there is no specific article devoted to this period, as there were many victims, especially in Bosniak and Serb parties. When it comes to the war in Kosovo, the issue was much simpler and faster, and it was clear that everything started from the conflict in Likosan, and international observers and rebellious Albanians clearly set out when and how to start an armed insurrection. Albanians celebrate on February 28 as the day of the uprising, but it seems that the attack on Likosana was held on February 27 at about 23:00. This has to be finally determined. Adem Jashari's dossier and his end-of-life activities need to be studied well. He is the alpha and omega of the beginning of the Kosovo war. — Baba Mica (talk) 14:35, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]