![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Why are notes c nad b posted as credible sources !? They are totaly opposite of credible. Furthere they claim: " By some sources" - what are those so called "some sources" ? I thought that wikipedia only deals with credible references ? And notes c and b for sure are not credible. Also they are twisting facts. Official history of Serbs by Vladimir Corovic don't mention "Christian army". Turkish sources don't mention it either. And i ask you which sources are more credible Serbian and Turkish (sides which participated in Battle of Kosovo) or some quazi-historical facts from nations which were thousands kilometers away from region of Kosmet !? Pure example of twisting facts is mentioning of Albanians Musachi. First of all term "Albania" was not mention until 1912 when Albania was created. Until than Albanians were called Arbanasi and Arnauti, by both Turks and Serbs. Second in 14th century at the time of battle of Kosovo 1389. , region which today is Albania was under Marko Mrnjancevic aka Kraljevic Marko - Serbian nobleman who was Turkish vazal (Turkish ally) and he didn't participant in Kosovo battle. Furthere all teritories south and south -east from Kosmet were under Turks and majority of population was islamised. So there are zero chances that any christian army could be formed from that region. You see pure facts and logic prove that notes c and b are false info. You can see mapes (created by people from West Europe, mainly Venecians) which show Balkans in late 14th century and which prove my point. Also i'm teaching right now how to cite references and i'm going to cite History of Serbs and turkish sources. Also majority of references cited in this article are from online books - which's pages(that were cited) can't be seen. That needs to be fixed.
I'm repeating this again. Notes c and b need to be deleted since they are pure example of twisting historical facts and violating the article. If that action is prevented i'm going to report this article ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danilo018 ( talk • contribs) 16:55, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
i changed it. it is clear that most of the things here was writen by a serbian nationalist.i dont know what you guys are reading in serbian text books but international sources are clear ,it is an Ottoman victory . after this victory ottomans took over much of the areas at balkans. please do not write here bias comments .this is wikipedia not a fictional storyboard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.24.203.241 ( talk) 03:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
It seems that this article has been hijacked by people who want to lead the article towards the results they like. It is a fact which is found in every major western academic book, and also in most Yugoslav history books, that many Albanian princes and Albanian fighters participated in the Battle of Kosovo, fighting alongside Lazar and against the Ottomans. I added just few of the sources you can find on this fact, but they were immediately deleted. It seems that someone doesn't like facts and history, but wants to go on with myths and legends. I cited the book, "The history of Serbia", and the Encyclopedia of World Conflicts. This article is too much WP:POV and WP:PSCI. ( Edvin ( talk) 19:12, 29 January 2012 (UTC))
King Llazar troops were in alliance with Murad and participated in the Battle of Konya (1386). After that Llazar denounced his allegiance to Ottomans and tried to form a Balkan coalition. He tried to get help from Holy Roman Empire and declared himself a vassal of Sigismund. A History of the Crusades: The Impact of the Crusades on Europe By Kenneth M. Setton, Harry W. Hazard, Norman P. Zacour p. 246-247
Prince (not king!) Lazar was not a Murad's ally. Please check Battle of Pločnik. Some other Serbian princes, including King Marko were Murad's vassals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by N Jordan ( talk • contribs) 02:07, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Result is "Tactically inconclusive" but its "Strategic Ottoman victory" also. Can anyone explain the meaning of this weird explanation in infobox of article?Is it because a mistake? Or serbian nationalists were here for underastimate and belittle the result of this battle. Then it's really childish,but not surprise it's very typical -- Kamuran Ötükenli ( talk) 09:38, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Here, its been started! Now please discuss your positions (and sources) and come to some sort of consensus, compromise, or agreement before WP:BLOCKs start getting handed out and this article gets full protection. Personally, I'm tired of this article showing up on the Special:PendingChanges list for same idiotic edit. Hvala. -- Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravian_Serbia 212.178.230.159 ( talk) 18:40, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Kosovo or Kosovo and Metohia is not recognized in the UN and global intergovernmental organizations. Kosovo or Kosovo and Metohia will never become member of the UN, due to Russian and Chinese right of VETO in the UN Security Council. Presently it is part of Serbia. 178.221.63.203 ( talk) 09:50, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
A request for assistance has been made at the Military History Project. -- Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 17:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
The correct location of the battle was Kosovo Polje. It is not Gazimestan, which is a monument for the battle situated about 6-7 kilometres north-northeast of the battle location. Khestwol ( talk) 21:47, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
(ping: Kansas Bear, Khestwol, Anupmehra, KTo288, George.Edward.C, Dusti, Ricky81682, Bobrayner, Surtsicna)
Does this edit [10] resolve the matter and treat the subject fairly and accurately? -- Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 22:03, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Can someone with access to the sources please check them. Was the Serbian formation a V formation or an inverted V formation? Both are possible, and both make tactical sense, a v formation would mean that the flanks are thrown forward, and it would have been the horse archers who would have made contact with the Ottomans first, in such a scenario the Serbian horse archers would be in position to enfilade the Ottoman centre, or (it does says in the article that the Serbian line was broader than the Turks) offer the possibility for the Serbian wings to attempt to flank the Ottoman wings. The Serbian heavy cavalry in the centre would have arrived after the wings engaged.
An inverted V, wedge, or arrow formation, was the classic formation of cavalry, designed to smash the enemy line in the centre. It would have required a lot less co-ordination than the V formation, and would have kept the less heavily armoured horse archers out of the fray until after the centres had engaged.-- KTo288 ( talk) 09:18, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Serbian heavy cavalry took V wedge shape charge position breaking through Ottoman infantry and light cavalry., thanks.-- KTo288 ( talk) 08:51, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
In an open field battle, if an army stands his ground no matter how high casualties it suffers, and the opposition is totally destroyed, then it is a victory. Posting info from a single resource and ignoring many others is simply vandalism.
Colin Imber (Author)r — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.253.194.104 ( talk) 23:23, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
If we had to go with either "Serbian victory" or "Ottoman victory", we'd be in trouble - since the victor, if any, simply isn't known. Though if we absolutely had to decide, we'd probably have to go with "Ottoman victory". Fortunately we don't have to do that, and can go with "tactically inconclusive". We could, however, be less ambiguous about the strategic effects and have "Ottoman strategic victory" as the second bullet point. How do you folks stand on that proposal? --
Director (
talk)
16:54, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
See A Military History of the Ottomans: From Osman to Atatürk by Edward J. Erickson and Mesut Uyar. "Both sides declared themselves victor but Ottoman claim is more realistic since they held their ground. This was a Phyrric victory for Ottomans." In military literature a side who held their ground after a battle is simply victor. First hand sources which claim that it was inconclusive are simply did not take this fact into consideration, so they are wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.185.159.39 ( talk) 14:40, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Battle of Kosovo/Archive 3. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about Battle of Kosovo/Archive 3 at the Reference desk. |
There is Serbian,British,Croatian,Bosnian even Albanian historian's or author's sources.But i can't see Turkish or Ottoman's historians sources in References section.If really there isn't so why?Why there is everyone except them?-- Kamuran Ötükenli ( talk) 08:01, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
To conclude, I would like once more to emphasize the point that it is time for Western and Balkan orientalism to abandon its recent perfunctory attitude toward the Turkish sources and to resume the scholarly critical scrutiny of the early Ottoman traditions.
Question about the size of the Armies ? I would like to ask where did you find those numbers ? Because according to some sources I˝ve read , the size of a Serbian army was about 77 000 , and the Ottoman army was twice the size , but according to the Turkish historian Ahmedi , the size of the Ottoman army was 100 000 , and the Serbian even bigger , but both sources agree that it was a larger scale battle then it is here described , could you please write something about it ?
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Battle of Kosovo/Archive 3. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about Battle of Kosovo/Archive 3 at the Reference desk. |
"Tactically inconclusive" is just sided and controversial explanation about this battle.It's common and usual work and goal of serbian nationalists. And i wonder why there is anything from real Ottoman history historians? There is nothing from their works. For example why there isn't something from Aşıkpaşazade who is one of the most imposrtant Ottoman historians from 15Th century? Also there is nothing from Ibn Kemal and his "Tevarih-i Al-i Osman (“The Chronicles of the House of Osman”)" work which is one of the most original and important source material,there is no any translation or transcription or even any mention. Also there is nothing form Joseph von Hammer-Purgstall and his very very famous and important work Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches which is 10 volumes! Jean-Paul Roux or Halil İnalcık works also. That people are greatest Ottoman historians and specialists on the topic but there is nothing from their works about this battle, is it a joke? Or what is your main goal,to allow the serbian nationalists to do what they want and to manipulate here with playing with words and sharing controversial works as references? Whatever wikipedia is not an academic source, and this type of things are one of the main reasons -- Kamuran Ötükenli ( talk) 10:09, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Lysandros ( talk) 16:55, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Then your sources are common and usual work and goal of Turkish nationalists, you cannot attack someone like that and then expect to be taken serious in your explanations , and who says that the sources are written by the Serbian nationalist ? You got some earliest sources like the letter from the Venices court about the battle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.100.170.70 ( talk) 07:28, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Mircea I of Wallachia was not participating in this battle. See
Talk:Mircea_I_of_Wallachia#Battle_of_Kosovo.--
Zoupan
10:46, 28 December 2015 (UTC) Blocked sock:
Ajdebre.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Battle of Kosovo. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:12, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Battle of Kosovo. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:46, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Kosovo. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:09, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Kosovo. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:38, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
I dunno what axe the recent driveby IP edits are grinding, but AFAICT every experienced editor so far favours leaving the result field as is. Pinkbeast ( talk) 22:33, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
{{geodata-check}}
The following coordinate fixes are needed for
— 89.110.206.53 ( talk) 16:47, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
@ SwedishHistorian1: Categories being added must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. See Subcategorization about subcategories and parent categories. thank you Aeengath ( talk) 13:51, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Needless to say that adding a map which depicts Kosovo as being entirely part of Serbia in an article about an event that only happened in Kosovo is clearly POV pushing. It should be removed immediately, what an absolute joke. Ahmet Q. ( talk) 15:36, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I agree with Vacant0, in order for the map section to be neutral it needs to have the maps of both Kosovo and Serbia. I don't see a reason why we should remove one of the maps as this version has been stable and neutral for a long time. Cheers! Elserbio00 ( talk) 23:57, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
the fact that the map was here for a long time does not matter since it's a clear violation of neutrality" – just to clarify, several administrators and notable contributors have previously edited this page, you've also previously edited this page a year ago, so my question is why didn't you remove the maps back then? No one complained about the maps before you did yesterday.
I'm pretty sure that I'm not wrong but if I am you can correct me on this one" because I did follow Sadko's edits for max three months and I might have missed on something, that's why I said that anyone can correct me on that one if I'm wrong.
Good day Ladies and Gentlemans,
I have read this conversation and I fully understand the view of Mr. Ahmet. The map of serbia shows Kosovo completly inside serbia without a single markation to show its borders as a disputed nation state. It is partitally recongized (98 UN members as of Wikipedia). The secession of Kosovo should be shown by some kind of line depicting its partital recognition as its own entity. For that I have made a map which show a thin red line around the Kosovan-serbian border and to show that its disputed. Also I have made serbia itself dark grey and Kosovo slightly lighter which also shows that its disputed. I and most of you should agree that this would be a neutral map showing the disputed status of Kosovo as it should instead of adding Kosovo completly without any markation to the territory of serbia.
I will insert the name of the image here:
Neutral_map_of_serbia_of_the_battle_of_Kosovo.png
or
File:Neutral map of serbia of the battle of Kosovo.png|thumb|Location of the battle of Kosovo (1389) in a map of serbia highlighting Kosovos partital recognition. <---(Do not forget the [[ ]] brackets while adding this code).
I hope we can agree on this.
Best regards,
InNeed95 ( talk) 13:52, 27 March 2021
Good day,
Some person removed the fact that some Albanian nobles fought under the command of Lazar in the battle of Kosova in 1389. It is clear from ottoman sources that some Albanian nobles fought in the battle.
This fact should be added again due to showing that Albanians and serbs actually fought together once and not against each other like now a days.
The removal seems to be made to show his/her hatred towards Albanians by not accepting the fact that Albanians fought along the serbs in the "holy" battle of Kosova only due to now a days hatred between most of the 2 ethnic groups.
I am requesting that this fact should be added again since hatred should not falsify history.
Best Regards,
InNeed95 — Preceding unsigned comment added by InNeed95 ( talk • contribs) 12:26, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Good day, the "fact" that "some Albanian nobles fought under the command of Lazar in the battle of Kosovo in 1389" is rubbish, claimed by Albanian propaganda in order to re-invent history of Kosovo, which has been entirely Serbian (In XV century, 98% population of Kosovo and Metohija were christian Serbs, 1% were Albanians, according to Turkish defter).
There is no Albanians present in Kosovo, before XVI century, until Ottomans brought Albanians to Kosovo.
That "fact" is a disgrace to wikipedia.
![]() | This
edit request to
Battle of Kosovo has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
„strangled his younger brother“ has to be replaced by „strangled his older brother“. 2.206.207.62 ( talk) 00:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
The 1389 Battle of Kosovo holds enormous significance in the formation and development of the modern Balkan states. What has given this single battle such resonance, more than six centuries later, and what does it reveal about the tangled complex of identity in the contemporary Balkans?The enduring power of the Serbian national myth, inspired by the epic of the resistance against the Ottomans on the Kosovan battlefield, is still visible throughout the ruins of Yugoslavia, is widely known and often told. Robert Elsie’s beautiful new translation brings a little-known Albanian account of the Battle brilliantly to life. This is the tale of Sultan Murat I’s campaign in the Balkans and his assassination by the Albanian knight Millosh Kopiliq, Miloš Obilić in the Serbian tradition.Anna Di Lellio’s commentary explores the significance of the Albanian epic for post-war Kosovo, where it reinforces a collective identity built on a myth of resistance against foreign oppressors, and on a strong identification with a European, predominantly Christian, civilization. The Battle of Kosovo 1389 argues for a critical reading of the poem as an alternative narrative, not an alternative true story of the historical battle. It is an important addition to our understanding of the Albanian debate on national and cultural belonging, as well as the more general issues of national memory and identity.
Anna Di Lellio:The Battle of Kosovo 1389An Albanian epicTranslations by Robert ElsieISBN 978-1-84885-094-1I.B. Tauris in association with the Centre for Albanian Studies, London 2009199 pp
Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).
http://books.elsie.de/2009-2005/b056_battle-of-kosovo.htm
![]() | This
edit request to
Battle of Kosovo has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
87.116.148.86 ( talk) 07:51, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Good day, the "fact" that "some Albanian nobles fought under the command of Lazar in the battle of Kosovo in 1389" is rubbish, claimed by Albanian propaganda in order to re-invent history of Kosovo, which has been entirely Serbian (In XV century, 98% population of Kosovo and Metohija were christian Serbs, 1% were Albanians, according to Turkish defter). There is no Albanians present in Kosovo, before XVI century, until Ottomans brought Albanians to Kosovo.
Due to Albanian propaganda in this article about Kosovo's batle, you have more Albanians mentioned than >Serbs, ridiculous.
In Serbian army of 30 000 soldiers, even if they were a small contingent of Albanian vassals, it was so minor number that no medieval source ever mentioned that. Every medieval source mention only Serbs, from Serbia and some troops of Serbs from Bosnia. But Albanian propaganda obviously has it's own way to re-invent history.
That "fact" is a disgrace to Wikipedia.
An unverifiable
WP:TERTIARY source was used and it supposedly described the order of battle, but it couldn't have done so because there is no information about the order of battle in contemporary or later sources. Emmert: The historian is faced with a difficult problem when he attempts to discover what occurred in the Battle of Kosovo. There are no eyewitness accounts of the battle, and rather significant differences exist among those contemporary sources which do mention the event. (..) The early documents are not particularly concerned with armaments, tactics, size of forces, and the general course of the battle. Surprisingly enough, it is not even possible to know with certainty from the extant contemporary material whether one or the other side was victorious on the field. There is certainly little to indicate that it was a great Serbian defeat; and the earliest reports of the conflict suggest, on the contrary, that the Christian forces had won.
I think that the section
Battle of Kosovo#Troop deployment should be removed but I've tagged it in case some sources do discuss the order the battle.--
Maleschreiber (
talk)
00:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
I have reverted an edit by Istinar. It removed Maleschreiber's cleanup and new sources but claims to add "sources back". I see an unverifiable WP:TERTIARY 1972 Yugoslav encyclopedia entry and one that doesn't talk about the battle at all being added back, and many other sources being removed. Durraz0 ( talk) 15:01, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 15:26, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
I had to revert Istinar again because he's adding the same sources again as previously explained by Maleschreiber [14] and their judging via personal assessment which commander belongs in the infobox and which doesn't. Infobox figures need to be added or removed per the sources. Ahmet Q. ( talk) 10:40, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
restoringsources. You are adding the same source - check the Cox citation. I don't like reporting other editors but you have to check your edits before we get to that point for the most needless of reasons. Ahmet Q. The commanders listed on the infobox are the ones which most probably were in the battle in a commanding role.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 10:56, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
So many problems here, let's start with the biggest one. While the battle ultimately resulted in an Ottoman victory, several scholars posit it was inconclusive
is a gigantic failure of NPOV, as is the dismissal of other references in the infobox.
FDW777 (
talk)
16:20, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi FDW777. You claim that "I made that edit again", but my two edits hugely differs. I am not "ignoring" what the other sources say, perhaps you didn't read the lead. However, as you can see from the number of sources, the widespread opinion seems to be that the battle resulted in an Ottoman victory. What led me to edit this article, and what should determine what to put in the infobox imo, is (as previously mentioned) the fact that Britannica says that the battle resulted in an Ottoman victory. Because of this, and the greater number of sources that says so, I believe that we should report "Ottoman victory" in the infobox. I look forward to hear whether you agree with me. If not, we'll have wait for a third opinion.-- Haldir Marchwarden ( talk) 16:21, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
While the battle ultimately resulted in an Ottoman victory, several scholars posit it was inconclusiveis such blatant POV it has no place in the encyclopedia. You can find plenty of third opinions in the archives where this has been extensively discussed. FDW777 ( talk) 16:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
The historian is faced with a difficult problem when he attempts to discover what occurred in the Battle of Kosovo. There are no eyewitness accounts of the battle, and rather significant differences exist among those contemporary sources which do mention the event. If you have some novel idea as to how this conflict among references should be dealt with I'm all ears, but so far your solution has been to simply discard the ones you don't agree with. FDW777 ( talk) 16:31, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
collapseof Serbia contradict the consensus in bibliography.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 16:22, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
I think it would be good if the image in the Infobox was different, as the current one (Petar Lubarda Kosovski boj 1953 Svecana Sala Novi Dvor Beograd.jpg) is not really truly representative of the battle. Lubarda's work is very modern, neo-realistic, and unclear, and I think a clearer/older image (such as this one: Battle of Kosovo, Adam Stefanović, 1870.jpg which is already in the article in the Kosovo Myth Section) would be better. -- Bombadil3019 ( talk) 18:38, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 12:08, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Battle of Kosovo has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
You use totaly false source for sides involved in a battl. It is higly incorect to falsfy history for approving todays agenda. If ther are diffrent opinians then they should be confirmd from trustfull source. So remove Principality of Muzaka. It is ridiculus to have this. Medasmc ( talk) 13:43, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Beteja e Kosovës ( Albanian ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:991C:CA00:5CE0:9B0:17E1:4C42 ( talk) 03:12, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Battle of Kosovo has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This battle is a ottoman victory. Trkmaq edits ( talk) 15:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
E Trkmaq edits ( talk) 15:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
You cannot call this war "Inconclusive" just because the sultan was killed. The sultan is killed after taking the victory. After Şehzade Bayezid came to the aid with a speed like a thunderbolt during the war and changed the fate of the war, the fleeing army was chased by Şehzade Yakup. If you do a little research, you will see that this war was an Ottoman victory. 2001:1C02:2C24:3100:E1DA:AFCC:7C38:D3FC ( talk) 18:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
C'est une victoire Ottomane les Serbes ont fuit même si le sultan Murad a était tuer sont fils Bayezid a pris le pouvoir Raziel1975S ( talk) 19:35, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
"Regardless of the exact army size, the battle of Kosovo was one of the large battles of late medieval times."
That should read "largest battles", especially with the immediately following comparison to the battle having involved at least 10000 men more than Agincourt. Deliusfan ( talk) 02:29, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Should the Albanian name for the battle be added since the Muzaka had a impact of the battle and fought for the Serbian side? AlexBachmann ( talk) 21:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Okay what is this? A year ago, the following names were written: Vuk Branković, Lazar Hrebeljanović, Vlatko Vuković and Teodor II Muzuka. And now Dhimitër Jonima and Andrea Gropa are writing out of nowhere. I think all the sources that have been posted were written after the war in Kosovo in 1999. Also only 1 source was not written by an Albanian.One source says King Marko of Bulgaria, which is absurd because his real name is Marko Mrnjavčević, his father Vukašin Mrnjavčević, on his Wikipedia it says "Vukašin of Serbia". To return to the fact that all the sources were written after 1999, I honestly think that it is Albanian nationalist propaganda for Kosovo and Metohija. Bokisa6372. ( talk) 22:14, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
we have 50 mentioning word "Albanian" in battle of Kosovo. "Albania", however, is mentioned the most in the sources section in the bottom of the article. (which technically does not count) AlexBachmann ( talk) 20:55, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Why are notes c nad b posted as credible sources !? They are totaly opposite of credible. Furthere they claim: " By some sources" - what are those so called "some sources" ? I thought that wikipedia only deals with credible references ? And notes c and b for sure are not credible. Also they are twisting facts. Official history of Serbs by Vladimir Corovic don't mention "Christian army". Turkish sources don't mention it either. And i ask you which sources are more credible Serbian and Turkish (sides which participated in Battle of Kosovo) or some quazi-historical facts from nations which were thousands kilometers away from region of Kosmet !? Pure example of twisting facts is mentioning of Albanians Musachi. First of all term "Albania" was not mention until 1912 when Albania was created. Until than Albanians were called Arbanasi and Arnauti, by both Turks and Serbs. Second in 14th century at the time of battle of Kosovo 1389. , region which today is Albania was under Marko Mrnjancevic aka Kraljevic Marko - Serbian nobleman who was Turkish vazal (Turkish ally) and he didn't participant in Kosovo battle. Furthere all teritories south and south -east from Kosmet were under Turks and majority of population was islamised. So there are zero chances that any christian army could be formed from that region. You see pure facts and logic prove that notes c and b are false info. You can see mapes (created by people from West Europe, mainly Venecians) which show Balkans in late 14th century and which prove my point. Also i'm teaching right now how to cite references and i'm going to cite History of Serbs and turkish sources. Also majority of references cited in this article are from online books - which's pages(that were cited) can't be seen. That needs to be fixed.
I'm repeating this again. Notes c and b need to be deleted since they are pure example of twisting historical facts and violating the article. If that action is prevented i'm going to report this article ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danilo018 ( talk • contribs) 16:55, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
i changed it. it is clear that most of the things here was writen by a serbian nationalist.i dont know what you guys are reading in serbian text books but international sources are clear ,it is an Ottoman victory . after this victory ottomans took over much of the areas at balkans. please do not write here bias comments .this is wikipedia not a fictional storyboard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.24.203.241 ( talk) 03:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
It seems that this article has been hijacked by people who want to lead the article towards the results they like. It is a fact which is found in every major western academic book, and also in most Yugoslav history books, that many Albanian princes and Albanian fighters participated in the Battle of Kosovo, fighting alongside Lazar and against the Ottomans. I added just few of the sources you can find on this fact, but they were immediately deleted. It seems that someone doesn't like facts and history, but wants to go on with myths and legends. I cited the book, "The history of Serbia", and the Encyclopedia of World Conflicts. This article is too much WP:POV and WP:PSCI. ( Edvin ( talk) 19:12, 29 January 2012 (UTC))
King Llazar troops were in alliance with Murad and participated in the Battle of Konya (1386). After that Llazar denounced his allegiance to Ottomans and tried to form a Balkan coalition. He tried to get help from Holy Roman Empire and declared himself a vassal of Sigismund. A History of the Crusades: The Impact of the Crusades on Europe By Kenneth M. Setton, Harry W. Hazard, Norman P. Zacour p. 246-247
Prince (not king!) Lazar was not a Murad's ally. Please check Battle of Pločnik. Some other Serbian princes, including King Marko were Murad's vassals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by N Jordan ( talk • contribs) 02:07, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Result is "Tactically inconclusive" but its "Strategic Ottoman victory" also. Can anyone explain the meaning of this weird explanation in infobox of article?Is it because a mistake? Or serbian nationalists were here for underastimate and belittle the result of this battle. Then it's really childish,but not surprise it's very typical -- Kamuran Ötükenli ( talk) 09:38, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Here, its been started! Now please discuss your positions (and sources) and come to some sort of consensus, compromise, or agreement before WP:BLOCKs start getting handed out and this article gets full protection. Personally, I'm tired of this article showing up on the Special:PendingChanges list for same idiotic edit. Hvala. -- Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravian_Serbia 212.178.230.159 ( talk) 18:40, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Kosovo or Kosovo and Metohia is not recognized in the UN and global intergovernmental organizations. Kosovo or Kosovo and Metohia will never become member of the UN, due to Russian and Chinese right of VETO in the UN Security Council. Presently it is part of Serbia. 178.221.63.203 ( talk) 09:50, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
A request for assistance has been made at the Military History Project. -- Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 17:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
The correct location of the battle was Kosovo Polje. It is not Gazimestan, which is a monument for the battle situated about 6-7 kilometres north-northeast of the battle location. Khestwol ( talk) 21:47, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
(ping: Kansas Bear, Khestwol, Anupmehra, KTo288, George.Edward.C, Dusti, Ricky81682, Bobrayner, Surtsicna)
Does this edit [10] resolve the matter and treat the subject fairly and accurately? -- Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 22:03, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Can someone with access to the sources please check them. Was the Serbian formation a V formation or an inverted V formation? Both are possible, and both make tactical sense, a v formation would mean that the flanks are thrown forward, and it would have been the horse archers who would have made contact with the Ottomans first, in such a scenario the Serbian horse archers would be in position to enfilade the Ottoman centre, or (it does says in the article that the Serbian line was broader than the Turks) offer the possibility for the Serbian wings to attempt to flank the Ottoman wings. The Serbian heavy cavalry in the centre would have arrived after the wings engaged.
An inverted V, wedge, or arrow formation, was the classic formation of cavalry, designed to smash the enemy line in the centre. It would have required a lot less co-ordination than the V formation, and would have kept the less heavily armoured horse archers out of the fray until after the centres had engaged.-- KTo288 ( talk) 09:18, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Serbian heavy cavalry took V wedge shape charge position breaking through Ottoman infantry and light cavalry., thanks.-- KTo288 ( talk) 08:51, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
In an open field battle, if an army stands his ground no matter how high casualties it suffers, and the opposition is totally destroyed, then it is a victory. Posting info from a single resource and ignoring many others is simply vandalism.
Colin Imber (Author)r — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.253.194.104 ( talk) 23:23, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
If we had to go with either "Serbian victory" or "Ottoman victory", we'd be in trouble - since the victor, if any, simply isn't known. Though if we absolutely had to decide, we'd probably have to go with "Ottoman victory". Fortunately we don't have to do that, and can go with "tactically inconclusive". We could, however, be less ambiguous about the strategic effects and have "Ottoman strategic victory" as the second bullet point. How do you folks stand on that proposal? --
Director (
talk)
16:54, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
See A Military History of the Ottomans: From Osman to Atatürk by Edward J. Erickson and Mesut Uyar. "Both sides declared themselves victor but Ottoman claim is more realistic since they held their ground. This was a Phyrric victory for Ottomans." In military literature a side who held their ground after a battle is simply victor. First hand sources which claim that it was inconclusive are simply did not take this fact into consideration, so they are wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.185.159.39 ( talk) 14:40, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Battle of Kosovo/Archive 3. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about Battle of Kosovo/Archive 3 at the Reference desk. |
There is Serbian,British,Croatian,Bosnian even Albanian historian's or author's sources.But i can't see Turkish or Ottoman's historians sources in References section.If really there isn't so why?Why there is everyone except them?-- Kamuran Ötükenli ( talk) 08:01, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
To conclude, I would like once more to emphasize the point that it is time for Western and Balkan orientalism to abandon its recent perfunctory attitude toward the Turkish sources and to resume the scholarly critical scrutiny of the early Ottoman traditions.
Question about the size of the Armies ? I would like to ask where did you find those numbers ? Because according to some sources I˝ve read , the size of a Serbian army was about 77 000 , and the Ottoman army was twice the size , but according to the Turkish historian Ahmedi , the size of the Ottoman army was 100 000 , and the Serbian even bigger , but both sources agree that it was a larger scale battle then it is here described , could you please write something about it ?
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Battle of Kosovo/Archive 3. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about Battle of Kosovo/Archive 3 at the Reference desk. |
"Tactically inconclusive" is just sided and controversial explanation about this battle.It's common and usual work and goal of serbian nationalists. And i wonder why there is anything from real Ottoman history historians? There is nothing from their works. For example why there isn't something from Aşıkpaşazade who is one of the most imposrtant Ottoman historians from 15Th century? Also there is nothing from Ibn Kemal and his "Tevarih-i Al-i Osman (“The Chronicles of the House of Osman”)" work which is one of the most original and important source material,there is no any translation or transcription or even any mention. Also there is nothing form Joseph von Hammer-Purgstall and his very very famous and important work Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches which is 10 volumes! Jean-Paul Roux or Halil İnalcık works also. That people are greatest Ottoman historians and specialists on the topic but there is nothing from their works about this battle, is it a joke? Or what is your main goal,to allow the serbian nationalists to do what they want and to manipulate here with playing with words and sharing controversial works as references? Whatever wikipedia is not an academic source, and this type of things are one of the main reasons -- Kamuran Ötükenli ( talk) 10:09, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Lysandros ( talk) 16:55, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Then your sources are common and usual work and goal of Turkish nationalists, you cannot attack someone like that and then expect to be taken serious in your explanations , and who says that the sources are written by the Serbian nationalist ? You got some earliest sources like the letter from the Venices court about the battle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.100.170.70 ( talk) 07:28, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Mircea I of Wallachia was not participating in this battle. See
Talk:Mircea_I_of_Wallachia#Battle_of_Kosovo.--
Zoupan
10:46, 28 December 2015 (UTC) Blocked sock:
Ajdebre.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Battle of Kosovo. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:12, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Battle of Kosovo. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:46, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Kosovo. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:09, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Kosovo. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:38, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
I dunno what axe the recent driveby IP edits are grinding, but AFAICT every experienced editor so far favours leaving the result field as is. Pinkbeast ( talk) 22:33, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
{{geodata-check}}
The following coordinate fixes are needed for
— 89.110.206.53 ( talk) 16:47, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
@ SwedishHistorian1: Categories being added must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. See Subcategorization about subcategories and parent categories. thank you Aeengath ( talk) 13:51, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Needless to say that adding a map which depicts Kosovo as being entirely part of Serbia in an article about an event that only happened in Kosovo is clearly POV pushing. It should be removed immediately, what an absolute joke. Ahmet Q. ( talk) 15:36, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I agree with Vacant0, in order for the map section to be neutral it needs to have the maps of both Kosovo and Serbia. I don't see a reason why we should remove one of the maps as this version has been stable and neutral for a long time. Cheers! Elserbio00 ( talk) 23:57, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
the fact that the map was here for a long time does not matter since it's a clear violation of neutrality" – just to clarify, several administrators and notable contributors have previously edited this page, you've also previously edited this page a year ago, so my question is why didn't you remove the maps back then? No one complained about the maps before you did yesterday.
I'm pretty sure that I'm not wrong but if I am you can correct me on this one" because I did follow Sadko's edits for max three months and I might have missed on something, that's why I said that anyone can correct me on that one if I'm wrong.
Good day Ladies and Gentlemans,
I have read this conversation and I fully understand the view of Mr. Ahmet. The map of serbia shows Kosovo completly inside serbia without a single markation to show its borders as a disputed nation state. It is partitally recongized (98 UN members as of Wikipedia). The secession of Kosovo should be shown by some kind of line depicting its partital recognition as its own entity. For that I have made a map which show a thin red line around the Kosovan-serbian border and to show that its disputed. Also I have made serbia itself dark grey and Kosovo slightly lighter which also shows that its disputed. I and most of you should agree that this would be a neutral map showing the disputed status of Kosovo as it should instead of adding Kosovo completly without any markation to the territory of serbia.
I will insert the name of the image here:
Neutral_map_of_serbia_of_the_battle_of_Kosovo.png
or
File:Neutral map of serbia of the battle of Kosovo.png|thumb|Location of the battle of Kosovo (1389) in a map of serbia highlighting Kosovos partital recognition. <---(Do not forget the [[ ]] brackets while adding this code).
I hope we can agree on this.
Best regards,
InNeed95 ( talk) 13:52, 27 March 2021
Good day,
Some person removed the fact that some Albanian nobles fought under the command of Lazar in the battle of Kosova in 1389. It is clear from ottoman sources that some Albanian nobles fought in the battle.
This fact should be added again due to showing that Albanians and serbs actually fought together once and not against each other like now a days.
The removal seems to be made to show his/her hatred towards Albanians by not accepting the fact that Albanians fought along the serbs in the "holy" battle of Kosova only due to now a days hatred between most of the 2 ethnic groups.
I am requesting that this fact should be added again since hatred should not falsify history.
Best Regards,
InNeed95 — Preceding unsigned comment added by InNeed95 ( talk • contribs) 12:26, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Good day, the "fact" that "some Albanian nobles fought under the command of Lazar in the battle of Kosovo in 1389" is rubbish, claimed by Albanian propaganda in order to re-invent history of Kosovo, which has been entirely Serbian (In XV century, 98% population of Kosovo and Metohija were christian Serbs, 1% were Albanians, according to Turkish defter).
There is no Albanians present in Kosovo, before XVI century, until Ottomans brought Albanians to Kosovo.
That "fact" is a disgrace to wikipedia.
![]() | This
edit request to
Battle of Kosovo has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
„strangled his younger brother“ has to be replaced by „strangled his older brother“. 2.206.207.62 ( talk) 00:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
The 1389 Battle of Kosovo holds enormous significance in the formation and development of the modern Balkan states. What has given this single battle such resonance, more than six centuries later, and what does it reveal about the tangled complex of identity in the contemporary Balkans?The enduring power of the Serbian national myth, inspired by the epic of the resistance against the Ottomans on the Kosovan battlefield, is still visible throughout the ruins of Yugoslavia, is widely known and often told. Robert Elsie’s beautiful new translation brings a little-known Albanian account of the Battle brilliantly to life. This is the tale of Sultan Murat I’s campaign in the Balkans and his assassination by the Albanian knight Millosh Kopiliq, Miloš Obilić in the Serbian tradition.Anna Di Lellio’s commentary explores the significance of the Albanian epic for post-war Kosovo, where it reinforces a collective identity built on a myth of resistance against foreign oppressors, and on a strong identification with a European, predominantly Christian, civilization. The Battle of Kosovo 1389 argues for a critical reading of the poem as an alternative narrative, not an alternative true story of the historical battle. It is an important addition to our understanding of the Albanian debate on national and cultural belonging, as well as the more general issues of national memory and identity.
Anna Di Lellio:The Battle of Kosovo 1389An Albanian epicTranslations by Robert ElsieISBN 978-1-84885-094-1I.B. Tauris in association with the Centre for Albanian Studies, London 2009199 pp
Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).
http://books.elsie.de/2009-2005/b056_battle-of-kosovo.htm
![]() | This
edit request to
Battle of Kosovo has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
87.116.148.86 ( talk) 07:51, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Good day, the "fact" that "some Albanian nobles fought under the command of Lazar in the battle of Kosovo in 1389" is rubbish, claimed by Albanian propaganda in order to re-invent history of Kosovo, which has been entirely Serbian (In XV century, 98% population of Kosovo and Metohija were christian Serbs, 1% were Albanians, according to Turkish defter). There is no Albanians present in Kosovo, before XVI century, until Ottomans brought Albanians to Kosovo.
Due to Albanian propaganda in this article about Kosovo's batle, you have more Albanians mentioned than >Serbs, ridiculous.
In Serbian army of 30 000 soldiers, even if they were a small contingent of Albanian vassals, it was so minor number that no medieval source ever mentioned that. Every medieval source mention only Serbs, from Serbia and some troops of Serbs from Bosnia. But Albanian propaganda obviously has it's own way to re-invent history.
That "fact" is a disgrace to Wikipedia.
An unverifiable
WP:TERTIARY source was used and it supposedly described the order of battle, but it couldn't have done so because there is no information about the order of battle in contemporary or later sources. Emmert: The historian is faced with a difficult problem when he attempts to discover what occurred in the Battle of Kosovo. There are no eyewitness accounts of the battle, and rather significant differences exist among those contemporary sources which do mention the event. (..) The early documents are not particularly concerned with armaments, tactics, size of forces, and the general course of the battle. Surprisingly enough, it is not even possible to know with certainty from the extant contemporary material whether one or the other side was victorious on the field. There is certainly little to indicate that it was a great Serbian defeat; and the earliest reports of the conflict suggest, on the contrary, that the Christian forces had won.
I think that the section
Battle of Kosovo#Troop deployment should be removed but I've tagged it in case some sources do discuss the order the battle.--
Maleschreiber (
talk)
00:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
I have reverted an edit by Istinar. It removed Maleschreiber's cleanup and new sources but claims to add "sources back". I see an unverifiable WP:TERTIARY 1972 Yugoslav encyclopedia entry and one that doesn't talk about the battle at all being added back, and many other sources being removed. Durraz0 ( talk) 15:01, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 15:26, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
I had to revert Istinar again because he's adding the same sources again as previously explained by Maleschreiber [14] and their judging via personal assessment which commander belongs in the infobox and which doesn't. Infobox figures need to be added or removed per the sources. Ahmet Q. ( talk) 10:40, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
restoringsources. You are adding the same source - check the Cox citation. I don't like reporting other editors but you have to check your edits before we get to that point for the most needless of reasons. Ahmet Q. The commanders listed on the infobox are the ones which most probably were in the battle in a commanding role.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 10:56, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
So many problems here, let's start with the biggest one. While the battle ultimately resulted in an Ottoman victory, several scholars posit it was inconclusive
is a gigantic failure of NPOV, as is the dismissal of other references in the infobox.
FDW777 (
talk)
16:20, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi FDW777. You claim that "I made that edit again", but my two edits hugely differs. I am not "ignoring" what the other sources say, perhaps you didn't read the lead. However, as you can see from the number of sources, the widespread opinion seems to be that the battle resulted in an Ottoman victory. What led me to edit this article, and what should determine what to put in the infobox imo, is (as previously mentioned) the fact that Britannica says that the battle resulted in an Ottoman victory. Because of this, and the greater number of sources that says so, I believe that we should report "Ottoman victory" in the infobox. I look forward to hear whether you agree with me. If not, we'll have wait for a third opinion.-- Haldir Marchwarden ( talk) 16:21, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
While the battle ultimately resulted in an Ottoman victory, several scholars posit it was inconclusiveis such blatant POV it has no place in the encyclopedia. You can find plenty of third opinions in the archives where this has been extensively discussed. FDW777 ( talk) 16:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
The historian is faced with a difficult problem when he attempts to discover what occurred in the Battle of Kosovo. There are no eyewitness accounts of the battle, and rather significant differences exist among those contemporary sources which do mention the event. If you have some novel idea as to how this conflict among references should be dealt with I'm all ears, but so far your solution has been to simply discard the ones you don't agree with. FDW777 ( talk) 16:31, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
collapseof Serbia contradict the consensus in bibliography.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 16:22, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
I think it would be good if the image in the Infobox was different, as the current one (Petar Lubarda Kosovski boj 1953 Svecana Sala Novi Dvor Beograd.jpg) is not really truly representative of the battle. Lubarda's work is very modern, neo-realistic, and unclear, and I think a clearer/older image (such as this one: Battle of Kosovo, Adam Stefanović, 1870.jpg which is already in the article in the Kosovo Myth Section) would be better. -- Bombadil3019 ( talk) 18:38, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 12:08, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Battle of Kosovo has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
You use totaly false source for sides involved in a battl. It is higly incorect to falsfy history for approving todays agenda. If ther are diffrent opinians then they should be confirmd from trustfull source. So remove Principality of Muzaka. It is ridiculus to have this. Medasmc ( talk) 13:43, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Beteja e Kosovës ( Albanian ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:991C:CA00:5CE0:9B0:17E1:4C42 ( talk) 03:12, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Battle of Kosovo has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This battle is a ottoman victory. Trkmaq edits ( talk) 15:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
E Trkmaq edits ( talk) 15:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
You cannot call this war "Inconclusive" just because the sultan was killed. The sultan is killed after taking the victory. After Şehzade Bayezid came to the aid with a speed like a thunderbolt during the war and changed the fate of the war, the fleeing army was chased by Şehzade Yakup. If you do a little research, you will see that this war was an Ottoman victory. 2001:1C02:2C24:3100:E1DA:AFCC:7C38:D3FC ( talk) 18:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
C'est une victoire Ottomane les Serbes ont fuit même si le sultan Murad a était tuer sont fils Bayezid a pris le pouvoir Raziel1975S ( talk) 19:35, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
"Regardless of the exact army size, the battle of Kosovo was one of the large battles of late medieval times."
That should read "largest battles", especially with the immediately following comparison to the battle having involved at least 10000 men more than Agincourt. Deliusfan ( talk) 02:29, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Should the Albanian name for the battle be added since the Muzaka had a impact of the battle and fought for the Serbian side? AlexBachmann ( talk) 21:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Okay what is this? A year ago, the following names were written: Vuk Branković, Lazar Hrebeljanović, Vlatko Vuković and Teodor II Muzuka. And now Dhimitër Jonima and Andrea Gropa are writing out of nowhere. I think all the sources that have been posted were written after the war in Kosovo in 1999. Also only 1 source was not written by an Albanian.One source says King Marko of Bulgaria, which is absurd because his real name is Marko Mrnjavčević, his father Vukašin Mrnjavčević, on his Wikipedia it says "Vukašin of Serbia". To return to the fact that all the sources were written after 1999, I honestly think that it is Albanian nationalist propaganda for Kosovo and Metohija. Bokisa6372. ( talk) 22:14, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
we have 50 mentioning word "Albanian" in battle of Kosovo. "Albania", however, is mentioned the most in the sources section in the bottom of the article. (which technically does not count) AlexBachmann ( talk) 20:55, 9 July 2023 (UTC)