Check it out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=192107371

I guess all you have to do to gain independence in wiki-land is self-declare.

I'm confused. How else does a state declare independence? Wait for a certificate through the mail?

The Kosovan government declared independence, ergo, they are a "self-declared independent state".

The "self-declared" phrase has been edited out of the article.

I'm glad... although it would have been tempting to add the phrase to the article on the United States. After all, we are a self-declared independent nation... yes, the declaration came in 1776... what's your point?

I still don't understand. Kosovo is a "self declared independent state". What is wrong with saying that?

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hOpJ8e...uGVGW7xE2ROQvMA

Is that "Neither Verifiability nor Truth?"

Given that this event has been discussed on the news for some months, it surprises me that this should be surprising or controversial statement, though I can understand that the "excitable locals" active on Wikipedia may have found a new battleground.

It's the opening line of the article. It's a nice case of a technically true statement being used to introduce spin.

Funny the Wikipedians seem to listen to me much more here and on my own site than they ever did when I was a regular user on Wikipedia itself. Not only that, but I don't have to mess with edit wars or jerk-offs calling for "moderation" (mediation).

Could posting on Wikipedia Review be the easiest way to edit Wikipedia?

Posting something on WR gives it weight.

Hmmm. I'm not sure about that. It is a clear statement of fact that best describes the current situation. It should be restored.


I know, everytime I bring up some crazy article here, it is gone the next time I look. Even List of Historical Bears bit the dust. Though it still says that Sir Paul McCartney was a "noted fan" of sweaty behemoth wrestler Giant Haystacks, which at best could be put down to some cheeky self-serving PR by Haystacks, and not a fact worthy of an encyclopedia.

At the moment, although WP should use a historical perspective, to me it is the second most notable thing about Kosovo aside from the relatively recent Kosovo crisis - admittedly this is from an entirely UK perspective, but it does not therefore appear to be undue weight from here. Objecting to it could have the appearance of being Serbian spin for example.

cf:



which seems like a perfectly reasonable intro to Rhodesia

I get the sense that the phrase "self-declared" was used as an implied negative, as in "they say they're independent but they're really not". While literally true, it comes off as having a POV.

It's either that or de facto. Not much choice.