Talk:Klokot/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Klokot. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Klokot. 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/20120218110812/http://www.ex-yupress.com/blic/blic21.html to http://www.ex-yupress.com/blic/blic21.html

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) 02:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

AirWolf, you have introduced several errors into the article, including a faulty demographics table, that it is part of ZSO since 2013, and a "settlements" parameter into the infobox (?). The census data needs to be explained accurately, which you failed to do.--Zoupan 23:35, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Zoupan Please, name these several errors. Define "faulty demographics table", table figures match those provided in the source (for municipality, not figures mentioned above the table for town). I don't see what is wrong with the "settlements" parameter within the infobox? Clearly, the municipality of Klokot has 4 settlements, 1 town and 3 villages, as seen in the content of the article. And once again, please name it how census data should be explained accurately: "The municipality of Klokot is ethnically mixed, consisting of Kosovo Albanians (53.3%), Kosovo Serbs (46%) and other minorities.[7] The town of Klokot consists of Kosovo Serbs (616, 57.9%), Kosovo Albanians (446, 41.9%) and two others.". There is no need to revert the whole texg to its previous version just because there was missing information; it could have been added later (e.g. The ethnic composition of the town of Klokot is mixed; it includes 616 Kosovo Serbs inhabitants (57.9%)...). Please, give some more detailed arguments before reverting the whole content to its prevoious version.--AirWolf ^talk 23:52, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Obviously, your "2015 est."-table, and "The municipality of Klokot is ethnically mixed, consisting of Kosovo Albanians (53.3%), Kosovo Serbs (46%) and other minorities." against "Serbs (71.23%)". This is refuted by the reliable version.--Zoupan 00:32, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Version of the article before your revert which lacks valuable arguments - [1]. It uses the following source for demographics - [2]. The article's content and source say the following: "The municipality of Klokot is ethnically mixed, consisting of Kosovo Albanians (53.3%), Kosovo Serbs (46%) and other minorities." Total population 2,556 inhabitants, of which 1,362 are Kosovo Albanians, 1,177 (53.3%) are Kosovo Serbs (46%). Also, census results say that, the town of Klokot consists of 616 Kosovo Serbs (57.9%), and 446 Kosovo Albanians (41.9%) and two others. I don't see where have you found figure of 71.23%, please provide source for your findings. This is your source (later found): [3] As these information are sensitive due to political situation in Kosovo, I agree that we should mention both figures and their source. And not just revert the whole content of the article as you did. The emphasis of my edits wasn't just on demographics section. Thus way, I will revert your edit, but will also mention these figures you find important for demographics.--AirWolf ^talk 10:58, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Now I rethought why have I made such edit by deleting info based on ECMI report (71.23% Serbs)? Because ECMI calls 2013 OSCE report, and in the meantime OSCE has published updated 2015 report which doesn't mention these previous figures. It is my logic that new information by the same source gives better and more reliable information.--AirWolf ^talk 11:04, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Please, if 2011 census results are concluded to be unreliable, why let that information have precedence over newer and more reliable data (2013)? The 2011 results were never removed, take a look at the section.--Zoupan 03:03, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

@Zoupan: Sir, you are totally ignoring my good faith edits as per WP:GF. You are completely reverting my edits, and yet in talk pointing to only one problem - that is which information we should use as valuable and right. Information supported with facts and references.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AirWolf (talk • contribs)

The ethnic composition of the municipality is as follows: [2011 census] and The municipality of Klokot has a Serb majority and Albanian minority [...] ECMI calculated [...] According to the 2011 census, which is unreliable [...] are two completely different ways of presenting information. One neglects other reliable sources and the other represents all data. Which one do you seriously think should stay in the article, and why? I do not understand how you are reasoning here at all.--Zoupan 23:18, 7 December 2017 (UTC)