Talk:Belgrade

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Belgrade article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 4 months

Belgrade is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 24, 2006.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 19, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
October 7, 2006	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
November 6, 2006	Featured article candidate	Promoted
July 31, 2007	Featured article review	Kept
May 28, 2022	Featured article review	Demoted
This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of April 30, 2006.
Current status: Former featured article

Cities: National capitals

	Cities portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities
	This article is supported by the project's national capital taskforce.

Serbia: Belgrade Top‑importance

	Serbia portal 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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Belgrade task force (marked as Top-importance).

Greece: Byzantine High‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Byzantine world task force.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

For a temporary period, only administrators may edit this page

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Pronunciation

I'm wondering about the pronunciation? The article cites a source showing three pronunciations but then consigns all but "Bel-grade" to a footnote, but I swear growing up in the US I always heard it "Bel-grahd" until a few years ago, and frankly, I think the growing preponderance of "Bel-grade" might be a bit of "citogenesis." I think all three ought to be in the header, rather than consigned to a footnote? Twin Bird (talk) 12:14, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Panorama picture should be updated

It looks much different now. There are many new buildings. 46.16.111.216 (talk) 14:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the previous panoramic picture:

the latest image is not a photograph at all; it is a computer-generated rendering of what the area is expected to look like in XY years when completed. It includes non-existent buildings and bridges.
I also skipped the previous photo because it is already included in the article.
Belgrade Waterfront is far from the most prominent part of Belgrade. Almost universally despised, it stands as a blemish on the city's urban landscape in every sense. Built on blood money linked to crime, theft, money laundering, prostitution, narcotics, human trafficking, and arms smuggling, it remains a symbol of corruption.

PajaBG (talk) 22:08, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Belgrade Waterfront picture. It's not the most popular nor the most prominent part of Belgrade which has a lot to offer besides the urbanistic-futuristic buildings on waterfront. Also panorama view is not visible as a shortcut of Belgrade. SatelliteChange (talk) 03:25, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with PajaBG about image choice. File:Panorama Belgrad.jpg is an optimal first image.—Alalch E. 23:24, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to treat any addition of a Belgrade Waterfront image as the first image as WP:PROMO. Change my mind. —Alalch E. 23:26, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These poor city articles..... accessibility scrolling nightmare.... not sure why people think 15 images/files in a lead for 4 paragraphs seems reasonable. Mass image spam in my opinion... that is the norm for these poor city articles. Probably our worst series of articles for image spam related to accessibility.... as we know most only scroll a few times and move on to something else. Moxy🍁 23:31, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same here, the panorama image is more likely to be recognised as Belgrade rather than a project that is recent enough to not ring any bells. Jurta ^talk/_he/they 23:43, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cont.

@Alalch E.: Hello. I think the photo from the stable version is the best (File:Belgrade Waterfront 12.jpg). This one is way back from 2013. Belgrade does not look like this anymore. It is all yellow and looks dirty. Also it does not represent anything. It shows the Church of Saint Sava which is already seen on the infobox. It does not look aesthetically pleasing like this. 95.86.51.136 (talk) 23:29, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it does look like that. That image captures the spirit of Belgrade even in 2025. It captures some important architecture of Belgrade and is vastly more representative of Belgrade than any Belgrade Waterfront image. Even if some of the buildings in File:Panorama Belgrad.jpg have changed in the past 12 years, most have not, and the fact that the Church of Saint Sava is repeated might suggest trimming the separate Church of Saint Sava photo (Moxy might agree with this based on what they wrote above). And yes, Belgrade is a bit dirty and a bit polluted. Per MOS:IMAGEREL, any image is primarily an illustrative aid to understanding. And Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative. Images are not supposed to make the subject looks pretty; this is not about making Belgrade look "modern" or "updated" with new generic real estate, it is about educating the reader about what Belgrade is actually, predominantly like.—Alalch E. 23:44, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection

@SatelliteChange and Whatismyname2000: I've protected the article for a second time. Please discuss here (using a request for comment if necessary) instead of edit-warring. Further disruption may result in blocks.

Thank you, Sdrqaz (talk) 16:45, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]